"Don't rewrite until you've finished first draft"-

[Flawed Creation]

i've always heard the advice "don't rewrite until you've finished oyur first draft," but i find myself guilty of this.

sometimes it's just my perfectionism, but several times now i've found holes in the plot/ badly thought out parts that just need to be redone for me to continue. after rewriting chapter one, which i posted in "share your work," i am discarding chapter 2 because the plot contained therein simply doesn't work. i hit a dead-end in chapter 5 and i'm fixing up the beginning to help me past it.

is this normal practice? is this a violation of the rule? is the rule even correct?

[Terra Aeterna]

My gut instinct is "do what works". But having met quite a few people who have never got to The End because they keep going back and fiddling with things makes me think that rewriting before you finish the whole thing is a dangerous practice. It may work for some, but for a whole lot of folks, rewriting keeps them from moving forward. And while we're on the subject of rewriting, I think line edits are a total waste of time until you've finished the first draft. After the first draft is done, you can review the whole thing for style and continuity and make changes accordingly.

My .02. Your mileage may vary.

[Flawed Creation]

that's kind of what i figured.

[Betty W01]

I can't stand it any more. It's a sickness, I know, but...

please change your signature. It's "apologize", not "apoligize".

Thanks. I can't stand incorrect spellings. It's a disease, I know. I can only hope it isn't fatal. (Probably not, unless it leads someone, some day, to kill me after one too many such posts...)

I'll leave quietly now... :gone

[Flawed Creation]

betty- it's fine.

i feel the same way. for some reason i can never spell apologize correctly.

it's weird. i'm a spelling bee champion. i won my (home)school bee twice times and tok third and fourth in my regional bees.

i cna spell "maxixe," "pretrophilus," "rattatouile," "seppuku," "miasma," you name it. but not apologize.

actually, when i wrote the sig i meant to type it with the "o", but hit the adjacent key by mistake.

but then, every time i looked at it i couldn't figure out which way it should be, and i was afraid to ask.

thanks.

EDIT: you didn't give an answer to the poll.

[maestrowork]

Flawed, why don't you just change it now?

[Jamesaritchie]

You have to do what works, pure and simple. And the way you know somethign is working is that you type "The End" in a reasonable amount of time, and then sell the novel. Many writers don't touch anything until the first draft is finished. That's how I work. My favorite quotation is "Don't get it right, get it written." --James Thurber.

But Dean Koontz rewrites each page as many as thirty times before moving on to the next page, and it seems to work pretty well for him. But the thing is, he still finished the novel pretty quickly.

I don't have to worry about plot holes as I go, simply because I don't believe at all in plotting a novel, ever, for any reason. But there are times when I'm seriously tempted to back up and fix some dialogue, or add a character, or eliminate a character. But I don't because I know I can do all this easily in the next draft.

And because when I do finish the first draft, I quite often discover I didn't really want to make thos changes, after all.

But you simply have to do what works. If you're making steady prograss and the novel is getting longer and longer and closer to the end all the time, whatever you're doing is probably working. If the novel isn't getting steadily longer and close rto the end, whatever you;re doing probably isn't working.

[evanaharris]

I tend to spend a lot of time trying to get the first one or two chapters written, and "right", but then I'm off until I get to the end. If something needs to be added, or subtracted, it happens *after* I get the "through-line"

[Euan Harvey]

>If you're making steady prograss and the novel is getting longer and longer and closer to the end all the time, whatever you're doing is probably working. If the novel isn't getting steadily longer and close rto the end, whatever you;re doing probably isn't working.

This seems like the key thing to me. When I was writing my (as yet unpublished) novel, I set a goal of writing at least 1,000 new words a day. This didn't include any rewrites or editing. I ended up rewriting a lot of it as I was working my way through, but everyday it got 1,000 words longer.

[Stace001]

I found with my first novel, whenever i got stuck i would go back and read the two or three chapters before. That usually managed to get me back on track so i could continue, however i almost always managed to find something in those chapters that needed changing, enhancing, etc. So while it took me longer to get back to the last chapter, the previous ones would get some much needed editing and i could feel good about what i had written.

[Jules Hall]

Definitely do what works. The advice is important for some people, because those people would never achieve anything except a perfect first chapter if they didn't take it :) .

FWIW, I don't consciously follow it, but I do have a rule of producing at least 600 new words every time I sit down to write. After I've done that, I feel free to revise anything I've done before. I don't do it often, but it happens. I do think revising is easier after you reach "THE END", though.

[John Buehler]

Comments from a novice.

Earlier in my work I would do what Stace describes. Now I'm of the opinion that slogging through to the end of the book is the way I want to do it. So I voted for 'Avoid'.

I've found that there are a number of details that I've worried about in the early going that are going to have to be reworked or discarded. Whole chapters are going to have to be rewritten because of things that I'm learning about my characters. I'm not going to do that now because if I change the story again in order to get the plot to work up to the proper climax, I may want to restore the original version in part or in whole.

By analogy, the climax is the handle of the whip and everything before it is the cord. Stuff moves around as it must in accordance with the dictates of the handle.

So I'm just working on getting all the words before THE END into the manuscript. Next time, I may spend time to create an outline with greater detail so that I can be more confident about fooling with character development and setting.

JB

[Yeshanu]

I'm with the "fix major plot holes" group because when I first started writing my novel, the very first draft of the first chapter came out pretty much unpublishable, and didn't lead me in a direction that would have got me to the climax.

It did, however, help me learn about the characters. So I rewrote it, then worked through to the end.

However, I would advise against substantial rewriting until you've reached THE END. I started doing that and spent a lot of time playing with the first hundred pages or so when the novel wasn't even finished and it took two years to get finished.

If I hadn't had rabid beta readers breathing down my neck all that time, it wouldn't have been finished at all...

I owe a lot to my long-suffering beta readers...:kiss

Ruth

[HollyB]

During the first draft of my novel, when I sat down at the computer, I'd reread what I'd written the day before, fixing little stuff like punctuation, stupid sentences, but not making major changes. Then I'd be in the "flow" of the novel and charge ahead with the writing. It saved some time during the second draft, so I could concentrate on the big stuff, like characters, plot lines, etc.

(Did it work? I dunno, I haven't sold the mss yet!)

[Jamesaritchie]

The one place where I don't follow my own advice is the opening scene. For me, the opening scene, the first three to ten pages, is everything. The opening scene not only sets the novel on course, but it also sets up the ending of the novel. Sometimes the opening scene is fine on the first write, but sometimes I'll have to rewrite it a dozen times before moving on.

The opening scene is everything for me. If I get it right, I know the rest of the novel will be fine, and I can write straight through to the end quickly.

[vstrauss]

>>i've always heard the advice "don't rewrite until you've finished oyur first draft," but i find myself guilty of this.<<

Why "guilty"? It's not a crime. I hate it that writers are encouraged to feel bad about working this way.

Plenty of people do it this way. Including, as I've probably said a lot too many times on this board, me. I start every writing day by revising what I did the day before--and usually the day before that and the day before that, right back to the start of the chapter sometimes. More times than I can count, I've found that the only way to get my head straight about going forward is to go back--sometimes way back--and assess what I've already done.

Writing can be like laying down track, where you put every section end to end and only look ahead. Or it can be like building a drystone wall, where the placement of each new stone depends on the placement of all the stones underneath it, and you have to look down before you can look up.

As with everything, a balance needs to be kept. Constant revision can certainly become an excuse for never getting on with it. But as others have said, you have to do what works for you, not blindly follow a method because someone told you it was a rule.

- Victoria

[Jamesaritchie]

One other thing about rewriting as you go. With a novel, I do rewrite the opening scene many times, but there's sometimes one other thing that causes a pause for a rewrite. If I come to place where I think, "Oops, that really was a dumb thing to write, and it won't work at all" I'll make a note to rewrite it later. But if the note just raises as many questions as it answers, I sometimes go back and change things right then.

This doesn't happen often at all, but it does happen.

And sometimes I'll start writing a sentence, get almost to the end of it, realize it's a real clunker and there's a far better way of wording it, I cross out with my pen, or run the delete key back, and rewrite that sentence. If you think of a far better way to write a sentence, or a really good turn of phrase jumps into your head, I think it's best to get it down right then, else you might forget it, or forget where you meant to use it.

Writing in longhand means I usually think about a sentence before I put it down on paper, sometimes running two or three variations through my head before committing anything to paper, but just about every page of longhand writing will contain one or two sentences that have been crossed out and rewritten on the spot.

It happens a bit more often at the computer. When writing on the computer, a sentence a paragraph or two up will jump out at me, and it will be bad. Sometimes it doesn't even make sense. That one I'll rewrite.

But whatever I do and however I do it, I make sure I advance the novel a certain amount each day.

Wirth short stories, I'm much more likely to go beginning to end without rewriting anything because the length means nothing is going to be forgotten or misplaced, and the rewriting will start soon, anyway. I'll often write the first draft of a short story beginning to end in three or four hours, so rewriting as I go just isn't necessary.

[Stace001]

Yeshanu and JB are right, I think. :smack It took me 2 years to finish my novel, and i probably could have finished it in half that time if i'd just stuck to it and waited until the end to edit.
So, i guess i'm changing my mind. (i'm a woman, i can do things like that) i think you should wait until you can type THE END before going back and editing anything.

[Betty W01]

Flawed, I don't write novels, thank God (I'd never finish one), but when I do articles, I usually do what one writer I know calls a "brain dump" and then go back and start tinkering. I may rewrite something a number of times (don't ask me how many times I've rewritten one particular book review and the latest restaurant review unless you want me to start sobbing in despair), but I try to at least get it out on paper all the way through first, FWIW.

And I know what you mean about spelling. I'm a spelling champ except out ould, when I become a total idjit. Can't spell it unless I can see it, and even then - is it "neccesary" or "necessary"? "Brocolli" or "broccoli"? "Cincinnati" or "Cincinatti"? Certain words I either have to look up each and every time or keep on a cheat sheet nearby when writing. Argh.

[Flawed Creation]

thanks to everyone: this has been a really interesting discussion.

i, too re-wrote my opening scene many times. i have realized that some of my rewriting is just line-editing that i don't need to do at this stage. but i've needed to do some re-writing. one pretty major re-write was precipitated by the deletion of a character i realized wasn't interesting. as a result his role in the story had to be shifted onto other people. now i'm stalled on chapter 5 and rewriting chapter 2 so that chapter 5 will work better.

James- you don't need to fix plot holes? that's interesting. i had always thought that unplotted writing would result in more plot holes.

or do you mean you don't worry about them until after first draft? i guess that could work, except that i sometmes have a problem so huge it simply must be fixed before i move on.

[evanaharris]

James- you don't need to fix plot holes? that's interesting. i had always thought that unplotted writing would result in more plot holes.

Now THAT'S a discussion worth having (not that this one hasn't been dandy to watch).

Telling a story without an outline, without "plotting" it, can be easy or difficult, can result in gaping plot holes you can drive a truck through and some of the most tightly plotted, natural prose ever. This gets easier with experience, as I'm sure James will attest. It's really just developing an ability to tell stories freely, and, over time, you learn what works, and what doesn't, and you apply those things automatically to your writing.

[Jamesaritchie]

No, I don't need to fix plot holes. I don't plot. I tell a story. If you tell a story, plot comes along as a by-product. So does subplot. As Ray Bradbury says, "Plot is the footprints left in the snow after the characters have passed."

I think most who don't write this way assume it's some sort of stream of consciousness writing, but it isn't. It's what Stephen King calls "situational writing." There's a difference. A big one.

It means the opening situation is what's important, and it's why it can take me as long to write the first chapter as it does to write the rest of the novel. If I get the opening situation right, all the pieces in place, the rest of the novel is, essentially, already written.

Good story structure is almost always circular. A story turns back on itself, so the opening and the ending are really the same thing, like a snake biting its own tale. I think many writers have trouble with endings because they take their eyes off the opening, or because they don't know how to set up the opening situation.

The opening situation ask questions, poses problems, and sets up character issues that need to be dealt with. The ending answers the questions, solves the problems, and resolves the character issues. The story between the two is the process that carries this out.

If the opening situation is set up properly, and if I let the story tell itself, the portion of the novel between the opening and the ending is a lot like a chess game where everything is action and reaction, all aimed at reaching the ending.

And all this sounds a lot more complicated than it is. It all boils down to the fact that if the opening is right, not an easy thing, the ending is already written, and the rest of the novel will almost write itself.

[maestrowork]

Do what works.

That said, I believe that if you constantly rewrite and fuss with the prose, you're slowing yourself down and discrupting your creative energy. I speak from experiece -- it took me over a year to write the first half of my first draft... then I just let it rip and I finished the second half in less than 3 months. I found the "don't rewrite until you finish" method more enjoyable.

I ended up spending considerable amount of time doing the rewrites and editing anyway. So it's better to defer that to until after the first draft is done -- gives me a sense of accomplishment anyway.

[evanaharris]

I don't plot. I tell a story.

care to expound? what's the fundamental difference, to you? how do you define plot?

I suppose I'd define plot as simply an order of events, but a story is simply a relation of that order of events.

[maestrowork]

Some people write that way, as James described. Stephen King does. They know what the story is -- they set it up, put some interesting people in an interesting situation/setting and let them run... the "plot" comes naturally as the characters start doing things. (Kinda like playing a game of Sim City...)

Some people like to plot it out, like a map. They want to know exactly how it goes from point A to point B until they get to the final destination.

I'm in between. I like to plot out my big set pieces. Then I let my characters do their thing between these set pieces, and the plot/subplot sort of fall into place that way.

[evanaharris]

Thing is, Maestro, I've done it both ways. One novel of mine was plotted out, I sat down and in the space of a day or came up with an outline that took me from the beginning of my story to the end. Now, that was easier because it was a comedic piece and I could jump from location to location, event to event to get things done. The other times I've tried it have been so-so, but I wonder if that was because I was forcing myself to write something that I didn't particularly care to write (thrillers, just for the cash.)

My current project didn't originate from an outline. I had my idea and I ran with it. I got snarled up about 17,000 words in, and had to reexamine some things, and I have a pseudo-outline (three columns for each of the three story lines, running several pages), but I don't consider that a real outline--just a sequence of events, and mainly just notes of things that I want to include.

[maestrowork]

Evan, I will come back to this: do what works. Each novel is different. Clearly a plot-driven story like a thriller or mystery would require more careful plotting than, say, a character driven story (romance, for example) or a mood piece (horror, for example).

[evanaharris]

Well, certainly do what works, but I'm still wonder how James approaches it, the fundamental difference between "plot" and "story" for him (and, indeed, so many other writers).

It's probably a bit of a moot cause. It doesn't really matter...

[HollyB]

I found this on another thread --

Plot is a literary convention.
Story is a force of nature.

(That quote is pinned right in the middle of my bulletin board, right next to the computer screen, so I can see it, always.)

[Jamesaritchie]

It can be difficult to explain, but plot is like the water a boat floats on, and story is the boat itself. Plot is what the characters are going to do, story is the characters actually doing it. Plot is sitting down and planning how to rob a bank, story is going and robbing the bank. Plot is the plan, story is the action.

Now, if you start telling a story, and if you start it at the right time and the right place with the right situation and characters and problems and questions, the novel unfolds as story, and plot is a by-product.

The novel unfolds as story because the setup means each action is followed by a reaction, each reaction by an action. Either side, protagonist or antagonist, can start with an action, then follow with a reaction, or start with a reaction, and then an follow with an action.

Rather than things happening from plot/plan, however, they happen because of situation and the nature of the characters. The story plots/plans itself because of the way the opening situation is set up.

Just as Ray Bradbury says, plot is the footptints the characters leave behind as they do their thing.

[Flawed Creation]

James- enough metaphysics.

plot is what happens. os is story. you cna glorify one as art if you like.

what it boils down to is that you either know what's going to happen or you don't. i started with teh start and end of my book, and am working in hooking up the middle.

i wrote a rough oultline so i would know where i was going. i tried to do without it but my writing was like flailing about out of control.

now, even though i have an outline, i frequently diverge from it when it "feels right" this often results in plot holes.

one last thing: saying you don't plot doesn't mean you have no plot holes. let me put it this way: doesn't it EVER happen that you find when you're 2-thirds of the way through that what you want to have happen is inconsistent with stuff that went before?

haven't you ever written something that didn't match something else? realized that something either didn't make sense, or you preferred it another way?

those are plot holes, or, in your case, story holes.

do you still go all the way through and then make things consistent? or do you find, like i do, that i ave to fix the previous part so i know where my book is coming from. for me, everyhintg has to at least have the right events happeing before i move on. once i've identified a problem, i have to fix it or i gets worse in a chain reaction through the book. everyhintg that depends on it is gone, which creates a chain reaction that requires huge editing if not nipped quickly in the bud.

[Jamesaritchie]

Plot and story are NOT the same thing. You're the first I've even heard suggest that they are. But I guess those who sit down and plot their novels don;t have to bother with telling the story because when the plotting is done, so is the novel.

[Euan Harvey]

>But I guess those who sit down and plot their novels don't have to bother with telling the story because when the plotting is done, so is the novel.

I think this is perhaps an overgeneralization, but I do agree with you that plot and story are not the same thing. IMHO, plot is simply 'what happens', while story is why it matters.

But that's probably just me...

I'm curious about something else. You mentioned that once you've finished the opening chapter the rest of the book writes itself, and also that (if I'm remembering you right) that once you have characters and a situation, the novel will write itself (OK, in a manner of speaking). But you also said (on another thread) that you don't like writing extensive bios of characters. I don't like writing bios either (it seems like a very mechanical process to me), and I also don't like working out all the details of a plot.

So I'm curious, how do you go about setting up a situation? Is it just a matter of getting characters, giving them conflicting desires and then letting them rip? If you don't do bios, is the first chapter then a matter of finding out what the characters want?

The reason I'm interested is that I want to start on another novel soon (after five months of writing short stories). I've got a rough idea of what I want the end to be, and the characters involved (rough sketches though), and the idea of winding characters up and then setting them off and seeing what they do appeals to me.

Cheers,

Euan

[Edited to say I think this was cross-posted with James below]

[Jamesaritchie]

And the answer is no, I never, ever find myself two thirds of the way through and find that what I want to happen is inconsistent with what went before.

I don't want anything to happen, ever, for any reason. That would be the inconsistency. I do not ever decide what happens next. That would be plotting, and I don't plot novels or short stories, period.

Neither does any other published writer I know who happens to write this way.

There's nothing metaphysical about this. It's simply a way of writing that lets the story itself dictate what happens next. The only thing I plan or plot at all is the opening, which for me is anywhere from three to ten pages. After this the story itself dictates what happens next, and I dont know what it's going to be until I write it.

I don't plan a page ahead, or even a sentence ahead. I don't want anything to happen. In a novel or a short story, the sentence I'm writing at the moment is dictated by the sentence I just wrote, and the action I'm writing at the moment is dictated by the action or reaction that came before.

The story plans itself because of how I wrote the opening, and it's all aimed right back where it started.

I know it's difficult for those who don't write this way to understand how it works, and many refuse to believe such writing isn't plotted, but it flat isn't. Plotting simply does not work for this type of writing, and the moment you plan or plot is the moment you blow it.

I'm almost always surprised by what happens next in a novel or short story because I almost never see in coming, and I never plan it.

I 've known dozens of pro writers who work this way, and who work very well this way. I think the best is Ray Bradbury, but there have been many others.

But simply put, plot and story are not even remotely the same thing ( or if they are, all my professors, my how-to books, and the best writers I've known are all wrong), and it's very difficult to run into plot holes when you don't plot. I do not ever plot a story. Plot is what is going to happen, what you plan to have happen, story is that thing actually happening.

You can plot a novel without ever writing a novel, but you can't tell the story without writing the novel.

Nor is it metaphysical to say the opening and the ending are the same thing, and when you've written the proper opening situation, you've already written a mirror image of the ending. This is just basic story structure, and it's understanding this that makes writing this way work.

I think this is a fast, natural way of writing, if you know how to do it, and it's the method nearly all the really prolific writers I've known used.

I run into some problems with the writing, but consistency of plot is never one of them, and neither is length.

But I'll give you one more metaphysical bone to gnaw on. Writing this way is, for me, more like being a chronicler than a creative writer. Once the opening situation is set up, I spend the rest of the short story or the rest of the novel following the protagonist around. All I do is write down what he does and sees and thinks and feels and hears and touches and all that happens to him. It's his story and I let him tell it. In talking to others who write this way, I find many of them think of it much the same way.

Hard as it is for someone who doesn't write this way to understand, I do not plot and do not plan and do not want or desire anything to happen next.

Sometimes the writing itself doesn't work, and I have to go back and fix it, but I don't have to go back and fix plot, and I don't have to worry about what comes next being inconsistent with what happened before, which is probably the main reason I've been able to sell so many first drafts under deadline pressure.

[LiamJackson]

I can tell the same story, through different plot vehicles. All that's affected is the mechanics of the storytelling, not the story, itself.

I write much like James. I determine the plot early on, usually by the end of the first ten pages. Then, the story unfolds. I've also used a scene-by-scene matrix as an outline. The process worked well enough, although I didn't have as much fun writing the tale.

As for the following comment:
<<I'm almost always surprised by what happens next in a novel or short story because I almost never see in coming, and I never plan it.>>

Agreed. I'd much rather experience what happens next, rather than see it coming from a mile away.

[Jules Hall]

I've written both with and without outlines, and seem to be fortunate in that I can work with both approaches. My first novel, for instance, was not outlined at all, and as James said, beyond the first chapter there was nothing in it that was pre-planned.

For my second novel, a time travel story, I had a specific end in mind (that is, I'd been reading a time travel story and thought "why didn't it end like this...?", so decided to write one that did), so I outlined it to ensure that was the end I reached.

With my next novel, I'm not sure which approach to take. I'm not particularly set on an ending, although there are some pieces of information I need my main character to discover, and a couple of ideas for interesting scenes to go through on the way. But all of this should arise naturally if I can just get all of the characters to come together.

What I'm wondering, for those who do write without any pre-planning... do your stories always _work_? Do you never reach the ending to find it isn't very good, and wish it had happened another way?

[maestrowork]

There are so many different ways to write a story. It's good to know how James or Liam work. Other people may work differently.

But it's essential to know that plot not= story. Plot is basically "something happens or someone does something, and the consequences afterward." It's not the same as the "story" which basically have a beginning (what happens first?), the middle (when the characters do their things), and an end. I know what my story is from the get-go. And I plot out some major elements. Then I let the characters and settings take me away. That's just how I work.

My story pretty much stays the same through and through. But plots -- I can delete them, move them around, try new paths, add new characters and take it somewhere else... that's part of the fun of being a writer: spontaneity.

I'd refer it back to my road trip analogy. Some people like to plot out the entire route and every intermediate destination (plot). Some people like to just get in the car and drive and see where they end up with. As long as they know what the trip (story) is, and am comfortable with the approach, they're going to have a good time.

Complicated stories may need more intricate plotting so that you don't get lost in your own world. I doubt that George Lucas wrote "Empire Strikes Back" organically -- the plot was so intricate, full of symbolism, parallels, mirrors, etc... And sometimes organic approach (how Stephen King works) may result in a story that rambles. There are pros and cons to these approaches.

Again, do what works for you.

[HollyB]

Have you ever read a "tightly plotted" novel and figured out by page 50 exactly what was going to happen at the end? As a reader, I hate that!

I think one of the benefits of James's approach is that you maintain an element of surprise in the writing. You may know, given your opening scenario, where the inevitable conclusion will lie, but you'll have some fun getting there!

[aka eraser]

Flawed, figuratively-speaking, you're learning to drive a car (as are many yet-to-be or seldom-published writers on this board).

You're ultra-conscious of where the brake pedal is in relation to the gas pedal, how often to check the mirrors, assessing just how much physical space your vehicle takes in a lane.

Now pretend you have to drive somewhere you've never been. Keeping directions in mind, watching for road signs while merging seamlessly with the traffic is an immensely difficult task when you're still focused on the minutiae of just operating the darn car.

James R has a million miles under his belt. Driving is automatic, leaving 90% of his mind free to ramble.

He has also stated, again and again, that the process he describes is the one that works for him.

As you "drive" more, you'll learn what works and what doesn't for you. But there's no short cut to experience. You have to put in your time behind the wheel.

[SRHowen]

But I'll give you one more metaphysical bone to gnaw on. Writing this way is, for me, more like being a chronicler than a creative writer. Once the opening situation is set up, I spend the rest of the short story or the rest of the novel following the protagonist around. All I do is write down what he does and sees and thinks and feels and hears and touches and all that happens to him. It's his story and I let him tell it. In talking to others who write this way, I find many of them think of it much the same way.

This is exactly how I feel and how I write. And this method of writing can not be explained to anyone who does not naturally do it.

As to plot vs story.

plot -- think in terms if Man vs Man, Man vs Nature etc--

Story -- what the writer uses to illustrate the plot.

For those who write as James does, as I do--we simply write then follow the characters and discover the plot at the end. And no I don't end up with holes either. And this is perhaps the hardest thing to explain--how do you know you need the dime for the pay toilet in chapter 3, so it is there in chapter 1? You don't, your character picks up that dime in chapter 1 and then has it in chapter 3--when the character picks it up in chapter 1 you have no idea why.

Same with other elements--the story unfolds for you almost as if you are a reader. You do not know what comes next or the ending.

Does this mean you don't need to edit? No, you still have to go back and tweak the writing to make the reader see the vision the characters showed you. But really have no idea where the story is going till you get there--as James said each sentence is only dependent on the one before it--I'll go even further--each work is only dependent on the one before it.

Shawn

[macalicious731]

I agree with James whole-heartedly here.
Plot is why the story exists, but it's the story that keeps you reading.

[vstrauss]

I agree with James (and everyone else who said so) that plot and story are different things. I don't agree, however, that plotting out a novel in advance is a story-killer. Once again, what works for the individual is what works.

I create a detailed synopsis that covers the main characters, the main plot turns, and the major themes. Then I put it away and write the novel from memory. Because I've worked a lot of stuff out in advance, I know where I'm going and what I'm saying; because I'm writing a story without constantly referring to a plot template, there's room for change and discovery--often a lot of change and discovery. My finished books always deviate to some degree from the original synopsis.

I arrived at this method because writing without planning things out ahead of time (which I did for my first three books) just did not work for me. It's like eraser said: you've got to put in your time behind the wheel.

- Victoria

[Flawed Creation]

OK, i now understand the distinction between plot and story.

on another note, i find the idea that ending is a mirror image of the beginning to be somewhat over simplistic. basing it off characters' goals doesn't work, because their goals can change, be abandoned or not be realized.

i'll give you the opening situation of my novel. i've "plotted" the end, so i know how it turns out (that's OK, right? you do that, i understand.)

i challenge you to figure out how everything turns out. not to the last detail, but the basic idea of the ending. the statuses of the characters. or the major ones, anyway.

in Tencael, the tenshi's (angels') floating palace, the Elders rule. they are supremely intelligent and totally logical beings who operate as efficiently as possible in pursuit of specific goals. Lucifer, a regular angel, disagrees with their policy of remaining uninvolved with human affairs (except for the occasional rescue mission or disaster relief.) he wants more militant involvement with humanity, including punishing the immoral and deposing unjust rulers.

the only Elder on his side is Michael, and even he thinks Lucifer is a little too extreme.

Ardrin, another radical angel has been stealing forbidden books recording the secrets and magic of ancient Xelos, knowledge that the Elders have repressed because it contains the history of the tenshi's origins, and would divide their loyalties.

Kiira is an old friend of Lucifer's, and helps him out simply because she can.

they find a magic sword and Lucifer becomes convinced that he's the chosen one, destined to bring order and justice to the world.

characters:

Lucifer: goal: political power/freedom.

Ardrin: goal: knowledge/freedom form oppression

Kiira: goal: help her friend, don't get in trouble.

Elders: want to keep everything running smoothly and avoid disturbances that would hinder the good works of the Tenshi.

Judas: another old friend of Lucifer's, but aligned with the elders. his goal is to keep Lucifer out of trouble.

also, on earth:

in the kingdom of Elvashka, young king Elvash isn't a very good ruler. what he wants is to be a good king, but he's weak-willed and overindulgent. his politics aren't very good, and he's spending through the treasury holding extravagant celebrations.

a secret society called the Liberi Umbri et Luci has started a rebellion. the cult leaders want to take over the kingdom, but most of the rebels just want to stop the king form ruining their livelihoods.

one of them, Lady Gertrude, is an very important agent, placed high in Elvash's court, but she's come to feel pity for him. still, she's determined to advance the rebellion's cause.

the king's champion, Thorson, has been contacted by the rebellion. he understands why they're rebelling and agrees, but he feel that his duty is to protect Elvash. to make matters worse, he falls in love with Gertrude, only to realize she's working for the rebellion.

Goals:

King: be a good king.

Thorson: avoid betraying the king, while helping the kingdom.

Gertrude: carry out her mission.

Cultists: amass power and followers

Rebels: improve their lot by removing the bad king.

finally, Wa'Marus, the devil, is stirring up trouble. he's behind Lucifer finding the sword, and he's fanning the flames of the rebellion by pushing Elvash into becoming increasingly paranoid, causing the more oppressed populace to hate him even more.

however, he finds out the secret history of Xelos, and that he and the angels are really kin...

Goal: initially, to spread chaos and destruction, but later?

i suspect that there's no way to figure out the end of this from the initial situation. i've considered many endings. i'm pretty happy with the current ones, though some details are still changing. i'm sure some of it will have changed by the time i get there.

still, the number of events that have to happen along the way (i don't know everything, but have a vague idea), have a complexity that i would never have come up with just blundering through. i've spent a lot of time tinkering with it, to make it just right. i expect to spend more. for me, that's the only way i get rich and interesting plots.

i suppose we represent two fundamentally different styles of writing.

[maestrowork]

There are linear stories (a thriller, for example) where the ending doesn't mirror the beginning, and circular stories (hero's journey, like LOtR) where the ending does.

[Jamesaritchie]

Even in nearly all the thrillers I've read, the ending mirrors the beginning. I can't remember the last time I read a story where the ending wasn't a direct reflection of the opening. Sometimes it's more subtle than others, but it's almost always there.

Barring stories that are series, there just isn't much point to an opening that isn't going to be mirrored in the ending. It's what openings are for.

Subtle or not, the opening sets up the problems a protagonist will have to solve, and the questions a protagonist will have to answer. The ending solves these problems and answers these questions. In doing so, the story comes full circle. It's pretty difficult not to come full circle and still make use of the opening.

I write mor ein the mystery and trhiller field these days than in any other, and the circular story structure is at least as common here as in any other field I've written in.

But at any rate, in situational writing, all stories come full circle, whether they're thrillers or westerns or romances.

[maestrowork]

It depends on what you mean by "mirroring." My definition seems different than yours.

The problem is, most American literature is written that way -- your present a problem in your opening chapter, then solve it by the end. It's the typical "Hero's Journey" arc, which is by definition a circular story, or what you call a "mirror" ending.

In a linear story (which is rare in American literature), the beginning and the ending may not be related at all.

To me, a true mirror ending should reflect the beginning. Like in LOtR, it begins peacefully in the Shire, and it ends peacefully in the Shire. In Jaws, it begins with the girl getting killed by the shark out in the sea, and it ends with the shark getting killed by the men out in the sea. A Star Trek episode probably doesn't have a mirror ending. A Simpson episode's ending usually doesn't reflect the beginning at all... (of course, how I'm talking about script instead of novels... but stories are stories...) And many Stephen King's stories do not end as a reflection of the beginning...

[Flawed Creation]

James- I'm sorry, i imputed too much meaning into your use of "mirror"

if all you mean is that the opening introduces the problems and questions then, of course, the end mirros the beginning.

in fact, all you're really saying is that the end is a consequence of the beginning.

i had interpreted you saying to mean that what the character's sought was what they would find.

[Gala]

Hero's journey stories can end anywhere in the journey. They can begin and end anywhere in the list/circle and don't have to do a complete round. After all, some heroes are killed in battle.

For me a satisfying, written story resolves, or at least reflects back to what the conflict or premise was at the beginning. S. King ends Misery with the author talking to his publisher, as he was in the beginning.

I don't have statistics, but I'd wager that enjoyable stories mirror back, resolve, or address (whatever one wants to call it) the beginning. It may be left to individual experience to state if that actually took place. IOW, a reader may not intellectualize that it did, but that doesn't mean he's correct about the author's intuition and intention.

I'm glad to see clarification of story vs. plot in later posts of this thread; it appeared at first some were using those to mean the same thing. Not that it matters; sometimes writers do the "right" thing intuitively and may not know the technical explanation.

I'm with jamesaritchie. I let the characters and story tell me where they want to go. I appreciate his detailed explanation of how this works for him, and will see about allowing more re-writing of opening or a key scene I can't get out of my noggin when it's first drafted, before continuing. Those characters do tend to yell when they want me to stop driving so fast.

[maestrowork]

Character driving the plot... that brings up a question:

What if you have the wrong characters? Or if your characterizations of these characters are wrong (assumptions, experiences, motivations, etc.)? Would they lead you to a wrong place based on unbelievable decisions and actions? Do you run the risk of going off the wrong path 2/3 way into your story, if you don't have an outline at all?

I think this is interesting.

[Gala]

Since you seem to be replying to me: For me, it is characters telling me the story.

I'm sure all the ? you raise re characters dictacting plot are as risky as driving to Starbucks for a fill, and chancing getting hit by somebody talking on their cell phone in the parking lot.

I didn't say I don't outline, ever (not that you were referring to me.) But since you mention that, as has been explained by others better than I could...outline is a tool. I use it on occasion to keep my thoughts straight but I'm not a slave to it. I LOVE to outline, so not doing one before I begin is a challenge. I jot notes and ideas.

Since the topic is re-writing: a technique is to write the draft, or more than one. Then do an outline from memory. See what that tells you. Can be a way to break through a stuck point.

I title my scenes, chapters, sections, as I go. From that I generate a TOC. Can be used as an outline.

etc.

[macalicious731]

I like outlining character and setting details too much - I never get to the actual story. :lol

Well, I guess that's an exaggeration...

But to go with Ray's question...

I never experienced a "wrong" character. The mains are always right on target. The only people who need a little tweaking (who are usually the ones to come in along the way) are the minor characters.

[macalicious731]

Okay, I take back what I just said in the other thread. I've been stuck on my opening for a long time. It's the initial meeting of the two main characters.

One of my characters was fine. The other was 'wrong.' Originally I was writing him as a bit arrogant, but once I switched him over to being naive, everything worked out fabulously.

But this was within the first thousand words. I'm just glad I realize it before the first ten thousand.

[Euan Harvey]

>I think this is interesting

Me too.

>Or if your characterizations of these characters are wrong (assumptions, experiences, motivations, etc.)? Would they lead you to a wrong place based on unbelievable decisions and actions?

Well, from what other have people have said, I guess only if you had a particular series of events in mind and then made your characters walk through that particular series, regardless of whether it fitted them or not.

Thinking back to when I wrote my first novel (being revised at the moment), the part when the story really seemed to take off was when I gave the protagonist a definite goal and then let him run around trying to complete it.

Basically, he had to get inside an estate and kill someone who was heavily guarded. I had no idea how he was going to do it, but I knew he was going to succeed. Somehow.

So I started with him up a tree looking down at the estate over the walls, and it went from there. The writing was easy and fun, and it's now the most fluid part of the book.

Unfortunately, for much of the rest of the book, I had a definite plot worked out in advance, and I shoehorned the characters into walking through it. I'm going through the book now editing it, and reworking the characterization so that it isn't inconsistent from place to place is a real pain in the backside. The one place where the story flows smoothly is when I gave the characters a clear motive (which I knew they were eventually going to succeed in), and then let them go at it.

My second novel stalled halfway through. I had outlined in great detail, even down to stating the conflict in each scene and what would happen, what the protag was going to think in the sequel to the scene and so on. I got 60,000 words in, and I was so bored with the blasted thing I stopped writing. It just wasn't any fun at all.

So the third one (which I'm planning to start as soon as term finishes and I finish grading finals), I'm going to start with a four line synopsis, clear motivations and background for each character, a very clear situation, then just let them go and see what happens.

[maestrowork]

I've learned to let my characters do their own things... the result is much more rewarding and surprising and real. If I dictate a certain scene and try to shoehorn my characters into that situation, most often it comes out stiff and unrealistic.

That said, I still do outline and I still plot out important set pieces -- otherwise, I'd be completely lost. I need a sense of direction, if not the exact itinerary to get me to the end.

[Pthom]

I wrote my story based on a half-baked idea that sounded "cool" to me. When I needed another character, I added one, developing his or her characteristics as I went, as needed, and changing them as needed. Only when I was 3/4 of the way through did I find any need to work out any sort of outline, primarily for continuity reasons. I used all sorts of outlining 'techniques': I,A,1,a -- spreadsheets, notes to myself all over the place.

I suppose if I could learn how to arrive at "The End" before I've written a quarter million words, I might not need that.
:grin

[John Buehler]

My second novel stalled halfway through. I had outlined in great detail, even down to stating the conflict in each scene and what would happen, what the protag was going to think in the sequel to the scene and so on. I got 60,000 words in, and I was so bored with the blasted thing I stopped writing. It just wasn't any fun at all.This is what I'm struggling with right now. And I happen to be just at the 60,000 word mark. I'm not having 'fun' with the last 30,000 words, but I'm gonna write 'em anyway. Because I've never written the last 30,000 words of a book. It's writing "THE END" that is really drawing me forward.

JB

[Betty W01]

YAY!!

:cheer


You go, guy - head for "THE END" and don't quit until you get there. Good for you!

[Greenwolf103]

What I'm wondering, for those who do write without any pre-planning... do your stories always _work_?

I almost never pre-plan my short stories. With novels, I'll plan them to death and get stuck. With short stories, I just start writing until "THE END." Go figure. :shrug But, then again, I tend to be merciless at analyzing every exact thing in my novels, right down to how my character will dress themself.

When I write my short stories, though, I just write the story as it happens in my head and I don't stop. I just write it and do any editing and analyzing later. I don't worry about planning the story because it's already "planned." And in these cases, the stories end up being pretty good without any changes needed.

But when it comes to a novel, yes, DEFINITELY. I don't plan every exact thing that happens but I just write out an "idea" of what happens and make notes as I go (I once found out I made a character's eye color green in chapter one then blue in chapter five).

In any event, you can plan and plot out your stories to death but they'll end up pretty much writing themselves.

Also: You might need to stop writing your first draft and start rewriting during cases when, for example, you realize you're writing with the wrong POV. That's just one instance where the "rule" wouldn't apply.

JMT

[Flawed Creation]

well, i think that it's easier to write a short story without an outline. there isn't as much to keep straight and consistent.

remembering all the little details of a novel gets hard.

[SRHowen]

that's just it--when you write without an outline and let the characters tell the story you don't have to remember the details--it just happens.

As James has said, as I have said, if you don't write this way it's hard to understand how it works.

The story is there--you just write it down one line at a time without knowing what comes next and the details work out right.

Shawn

[Flawed Creation]

I guess...

that sounds interesting. i'm sceptical, but i've tried something like that. i do think it will work better in a short story, in general. i'll try that kind of writing again sometime.

still, I wonder if it doesn't depend on what you write.

my current book, in particular, i couldn't imagine writing without my outline. it's fantasy, which requires that continuity be preserved even mroe strongly. the events and storyline have some symbolism to them (and will have more by the time i'm done), and are designed to trasnmit a single concept- the concept of flawed creation (i can't summarize my idea very well, but it makes sense to me.)

there are some things that i've written, and then gone back and changed to amke them more interesting, more developing, and more integral to the story.

i know how it ends (and it's very different from the beginning.) and while the middle isn't very clearly outlined, at least i know where i'm going.

maybe my next book will be a real-world story about a person coming to terms with society. there i could see writing that way. no making sure the magic works right. no explaining the way magic works before it's used, in order to maintain verisimilitude. no necessity for each character's death to reflect their failings.

well, thank you everyone. i think i've learned a lot.

i'll stick with my method of writing for now, but i understand your points- and i may try it some time.

for now, i think the best method combines some of both- knowing what you're trying to achieve, but letting the story grow and change in interesting ways.

[willmarks]

Hi guys,

Interesting discussion. Hope I'm not too late to chime in with my two cents worth.

In the kind of writing I do, the characters drive the plot. Who they are should be known at the start, not necessarily what they do or what happens to them.

So do you fix plot holes?; until you get to the end you may not be fully sure of what the plot is you're fixing, and if you spend all the time fixing, you may never get there.

If you've got character problems, however, then I can see that pushing on regardless will create a lot of unusable text. If this is the problem, rewriting is probably just fiddling around with the trees and you probably need to step back and do some rethinking about your forest.

Maybe by talking a walk in the woods. :rollin

[LiamJackson]

Welcome to AW, WMarks.

[James D Macdonald]

Hi, Will.

You and I are singing off the same page. Interesting characters in interesting places will provide interesting things.

I like to have a goal in mind, but that changes as the story changes while I'm writing it.

[John Buehler]

If you've got character problems, however, then I can see that pushing on regardless will create a lot of unusable text. If this is the problem, rewriting is probably just fiddling around with the trees and you probably need to step back and do some rethinking about your forest.And you've just summarized exactly where I am. The characters weren't properly developed, so I ended up with the last two chapters being unusable. As a result, I'm currently studying forestry instead of writing.

JB

[willmarks]

Hi guys, thanks for the welcome

I’ve mentioned this example in another thread, but it applies here too - F. Scott Fitzgerald advised Hemingway to cut completely the first two chapters of “The Sun Also Rises”, which he did.

Instead he launches straight into the narrator analysing another character, the tone of which tells you a lot abut the narrator. So it’s all character.

Apparently Fitzgerald thought the first chapters were unnecessary back story. Even though they may have weakened the story, I’d still love to have a look at them now!

In my case I also found myself writing a lot of back story, considerably more than two chapters, all of which I cut completely in about the third rewrite. At the time it was a little hard to let go, but it felt great being able to start the story powerfully, and I had no regrets about the time spent because by then I had a really solid handle on the characters which guided me through the rest of the writing process. Even then, it was only once I got to the absolute end (not just of the first draft, but of many rewrites), that I truly discovered my beginning.

Now I have no hesitation in writing a lot of initial character centred text without the expectation that it will necessarily end up in the final ms. But if I can get it right the first time, that’s fine too. :)

[James D Macdonald]

Bram Stoker cut the first chapter from <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0451523377/ref=nosim/madhousemanor" target="_new">Dracula</A>.

It was subsequently printed as a short story, under the title <a href="http://www.sff.net/people/doylemacdonald/L_guest.htm" target="_new">"Dracula's Guest."</a> (Full text of the short story at the link.)

[Flawed Creation]

hmm...

i think i agree with you, james.

the disagreement seems mainly semantic. by redefining plot problems as character problems, there cannot be any plot problems. when the wrong thing happens, it's not the wrong thing, it's the wrong thing for your characters, which can occur if (a)you are forcing them to do things they wouldn't, or (b) the characters are wrong.

either of these things could be considered a plot error too.

like you james, i started with a goal, but it's changed as i wrote.

the two camps of this debate are less different then they appear.

[maestrowork]

As Uncle Jim said, do what works. Arguing about it is like arguing if someone should like apples or pears.

[HConn]

Mmmmm.

Pears.

[LiamJackson]

Strawberries...why no strawberries??

So, out of the many (many, many, many) posts on this topic, do we have a consensus regarding the original issue?

(checks watch to count the seconds before someone asks "What was the original issue?")

[James D Macdonald]

James Thurber, James Ritchie, and James Macdonald have all said words to the effect of "what's best is what works for you."

The Jameses have a consensus.

Strawberries.

[namedujour]

Do what works. Period. Even do it my way if THAT works. I write the beginning of the book, then I write the end. That way I know where the book is going and have a goal to shoot for. Then I write the middle in no particular order, putting things down as they occur to me so I don't lose the thought. When any portion of it goes stale, I move to another part of the book and work on that. Then I go back to the portion I couldn't "judge" because I was so sick of it earlier, and see it with new eyes. I go back and forth, back and forth, rewriting my brains out. Nothing is done until the whole book is done. But the whole book gets done. It just evolves as an entire unit that grows and grows into a larger one, instead of a sequence of chapters that follow each other like cars in a train.

The advantage of this is that you catch inconsistencies because you're constantly going through everything. This was particularly critical with my first book, which had a very involved storyline with a number of characters. I don't know what the DISadvantage is, for me at least. That's what works for me, so that's how I continue to do it. I can't imagine doing it any other way.

[maestrowork]

I usually write chronologically, but now I think maybe I should try doing it out of order. It's just that I like structures and I don't like having things all over the place, here and there, snips and bits... it makes it harder for me to organize my thoughts. But sometimes I just want to write a scene as it comes to me, even when it's out of order.

[macalicious731]

Pineapples! Where's the love for pineapples?

Last night I wrote a scene way out of order. Thousands and thousands of words down the line... I've never done that before. I was just starting to fall asleep, and then it just kind of hit me. I was afraid I was going to forget, so I turned on the light and wrote out the whole thing long-hand. (Another first.)

Kind of freeing!

(Fine, okay, I'll take the strawberries.)

[Flawed Creation]

name dujour- that's much like what i'm doing.... though when im' not inspired to write any particular scene i revert to chronological order.

grapefruit!

[maestrowork]

MANGO!

(image of Chris Katan just came up)

[ChunkyC]

I was afraid I was going to forget, so I turned on the light and wrote out the whole thing long-hand.
I have half a dozen notebooks scattered around the house for that very reason.

I start an outline file (chapter synopses) for each story and pop my notes into it. These become the signposts I write toward.

As for the character driving the story, I wholeheartedly agree with knowing who these folks are. Then when something happens, their response to it should be obvious. The plot grows from these responses.

That's my take on it anyway. :)

[Jyndral]

I'm a firm believer in the "do-what-works" department. For me, it varies from project to project. Sometimes, I have to wait until I'm done. Other times, I have to indulge both the editor and the creator, so I edit as I go.

~Jen

[mr mistook]

Look at it like this:

When building a house, do you finish and decorate one room at a time? No! You rough out the skeleton with joists and studs and proceed to the plumbing and wiring. Later on you insulate and hang the drywall. Only after all this is done do you paint, decorate and furnish.

To think that you can write a novel - finishing every chapter in whole as you move along is ludicrous.

In every other art, craft, and science, the rule is to "rough-out" the main things and work the details in slowly and carefully, jumping around the work to make sure all is even and balanced.

Testing the waters of latter chapters before the initial chapters are finished can be a great way to work in "foreshadowing" as well as developing characters.

I say jump around the novel! Whenever you're bored with one chapter, it's a sign that you need some new inspiration. Move on to a different part of the story and come back when you feel fresh.

[Writing Again]

I think you should do at least one thing in every novel that you have never done before.

[maestrowork]

My second novel is so different from my first. It's been a challenge. But I think it's worth it.

[Jill379]

I have heard that there are 2 major ways that published authors finish their novels. One is not to edit until you are through. The other is to go back and edit every 2 or 3 chapters. This saves you from having to do a massive rewrite on your novel. That's what I'm doing. Of course, I'm not finished with my novel yet, but that's due more to not enough time to do everything my life demands than to over-editing.

Jill

[maestrowork]

I wrote my first novel by "edit as I go." It took a long time because I could be such professionist. The result is that the rewrite took a much shorter time, but the actual first draft took a LONG time.

This time around, I am forbidding myself to edit. Nah-uh. Not even fixing glaring typos (okay, I admit I cheated a few times... when I start a new section, I always read what I've written before and sometimes I do fix typos, etc.). There are things later on that I change and would affect the beginning; I'd just put a BIG red note in the ms. without going back and fix things. I find myself writing faster and more freely this way.

[Nateskate]

I think of guidelines, not rules, when it comes to writing. And for the most part, people who made the rules are people who found that they worked for them.


I've made major changes in story lines. The only down side to what I call "Punching in" and changing a part, is that you'd need to go through the story again to make sure that it is consistent.

But I've made good guys into bad guys, and bad guys into good guys. I began one story with a discovery, and then changed it to a murder, simply because I thought it was a more compelling opening. It wasn't a story about murder, rather it was only to point to the seriousness of the discovery.

Sure, you make more work for yourself, but in the end, the finished product is what counts.

[preyer]

every now and then i'll get bored and just pick a random section out to run through and fix some things. then sometimes i write something that's just so awful it demands attention, like the idea is there, something that has to exist in the middle of the book, but i was just being a particularly bad writer that day. things like that stick in my craw. my WIP's opening was so awful, i *had* to tinker with it until i was satisfied it was at a rough draft level so i *could* lay it aside for now, if that makes sense.

usually, by the end of the book, i've done a kind of second draft to half of the thing already. normally not much changes, it's just nice to be a little more done. i view it as getting a slight head start on the next phase.

[mr mistook]

with my current WIP, I'm like the city worker who plants flowers on the median of the main boulevard through town. By the time I get to 20th street, the flowers at 1st are whithering and brown. I go back and re-plant, but by the time I'm to 10th, the ones on 20th aren't looking so colorful anymore.

[James D Macdonald]

One thing that helps me is to send each chapter as it's completed to a trusted friend, and to do that on a regular schedule (every Friday, for example).

[Trapped in amber]

I almost always wait until I've reached the end before editing. I need to have some idea of the whole before I can edit properly.

I also have to have some distance, and an initial feeling of slight unfamiliarity, to start editing. Otherwise I can't get the evil little goblin wittering on about how terrible my writing is to shut up long enough to evaluate it myself.

Having said that, I recently rewrote the first four chapters of a novel. I got completely blocked, and I just couldn't get out of it. When I looked over what I'd done I saw that the plot had shot off into a dead end. I rewrote it and haven't had a problem since. However, the new version is as rough as the previous one, except for the plot functioning better.
----------------------------------------------------------

[Writing Again]

Not sure how this fits in, but I write a new chapter that has elements in it that were not forecast in any way in the past chapters -- So I go back and insert whatever is needed to make it plausible -- As I do so I rewrite and or edit everything I come across.

For instance let us say I decide the best way to cross a river is to have the hero bend a tree down to the ground and then have it throw him across.

I will go back as far as possible and insert things of interest about the properties of this wonderful wood. Girdles are made of it in some places and it is almost as good. A fisherman either has or wishes he had a fine pole made of this extremely flexible wood, and the most prized bow in the kingdom is made of it.

Thus when the reader comes to this highly improbable tree and watches the hero make his miraculous escape, the reader will be so well prepared for it that it will seem inevitable.

In doing this I will read and edit the entire novel back up to where I currently am and then continue from there.

[maestrowork]

Writing Again, normally I'd just put a note in the draft, in red, something like: [must go back to put in some foreshadowing so that the improbably tree will make sense].

Then I'll move on.

[vetinari]

I'm on my first novel (my first real one, anyway...the one from years ago doesn't count because it's horrible). I started it in January after getting the idea at Christmastime. 10 months later, I figure I'm around four chapters from the end.

I've already run a major edit of the first three chapters, because they felt like they dragged. I've gone back several times to fix several plot holes (one of them a gaping gash the size of Mick Jagger's mouth). And when I sit down to write, I constantly go back and read the last couple of pages to get the feel of where I'm going next. When I do, I usually change a couple of things.

I think the story, in some cases, dictates how it wants to be written. I've been writing shorts for 20 years now, and I've always gotten that feeling from it. This is the first novel in that timeframe that's allowed me to get past chapter ten, and it still seems to be the rule.

I tend to highlight things I want to fix on the screen. And I have a reference copy printed out with chapter tabs, plot point tabs, and plenty of red ink to be fixed later.

[triceretops]

Major rewrite comes last, but I doctor plot holes and fix continuity problems at the first instant I discover them.

Tri

[Higgins]

i've always heard the advice "don't rewrite until you've finished oyur first draft," but i find myself guilty of this.

sometimes it's just my perfectionism, but several times now i've found holes in the plot/ badly thought out parts that just need to be redone for me to continue. after rewriting chapter one, which i posted in "share your work," i am discarding chapter 2 because the plot contained therein simply doesn't work. i hit a dead-end in chapter 5 and i'm fixing up the beginning to help me past it.

is this normal practice? is this a violation of the rule? is the rule even correct?

I find it helpful to get some kind of draft done before going into reshaping things, otherwise it is hard to tell what to toss and what to keep in an overall kind of way. Sometimes of course you end up with an additional novel in the debris, but that can be fine too.

[Carrie in PA]

I've been trying to finish my first draft before I go back and do a bunch of work. I don't want to get bogged down fixing all the stuff I know is wrong and never finishing it.

So my system has been to make lots of notes. I have a boatload of scenes to delete, a bunch to add, lots of character development I need to write in... tons of stuff. But I want to focus on finishing first. Then I'll go back and focus on reworking. Then I'll focus on cleaning it up... etc.

[FergieC]

I think you should do at least one thing in every novel that you have never done before.

I like that idea!

I've found each novel has been different so far. When I first started trying to write novels, I fell into that trap of just keeping on re-writing the first few chapters and never finishing. I think that may be a trap you fall into if you're really not sure where the novel's going. In the first faltering attempts, 80,000 words seems like a crazy amount and you can't imagine how you'll get there.

The first novel I ever finished, I went with the excellent advice of keep going; don't fiddle with earlier chapters just get to the end and see what you have, then re-write. So I got to the end, and what was there was such a dog's breakfast I didn't know where to start with the re-writes. But, it was a completed novel all the same, which is an achievement.

So the next one, I hit a middle ground of keeping going but not being afraid to go back and re-write, polish as I went, pause writing for a while if I wasn't sure where it was going and re-write instead. That worked far, far, better. The completed novel needed a lot of work in terms of re-writing and revising, but structurally, as a novel, it's there.

The new one I've just started seems to be going further again towards re-writing and plotting more carefully as I go. I no longer worry about whether I'll finish or not - I know can do that now; I know I won't spend forever tinkering with the first few chapters. But the further through I get, the more the first few can be improved.

So I'm a great believer in whatever works, and I have a feeling 'whatever works' will be different all the time.

[Simple Living]

The only "rewrite" I will do in a first draft is renaming a character. That's it. The point is to get the first draft written. First drafts are horrifically unusable for 99% of writers anyway. Statistics show that most people who edit during their first drafts actually never finish their first drafts.

Write Now. Right Later.

[Danger Jane]

woa resurrection.


I do what works. I can't write crap the first time like I hear you should. I don't spend an hour stuck on the phrasing of one sentence--but I like my first drafts to have the cleanest prose they can. When an edit or a rewrite is particularly daunting, I leave it till later and continue as if I've already made the changes I needed. And then when I really can't leave it anymore, I do the edits. Sometimes after the first draft. Sometimes during. It works.

[KTC]

I never rewrite a single word until I'm finished. The road only goes one way...to the end. You could never look back, never look back. Until you're finished, that is. The first edit is like the day of reckoning...I get to see my novel flash before my eyes.

Cool resurrection. You must of had to ice pick this one from the depths.

[amber_grosjean]

Since everyone writes differently, it would be very hard to say write first, then edit its the law. It isn't a law at all and each writer should do what works for them. I think in order to learn what works the best, a writer should try it all but other than that, editing should be done how ever works for each writer.

Personally, I try to write the full book first, you know get it out of my head. If it doesn't work, then I will rewrite it until something does work. There was one book that didn't want to cooporate with me very well so I stopped half-way through and will rewrite before its over but that's only because I know how it will end which I usually don't. I like not knowing, it makes me want to keep writing the story, it compells me to move forward just as the readers must turn the page to read on. What works for me isn't going to work for someone else and I respect that!

Amber

[Shady Lane]

I never get the urge to rewrite during the first draft, because I'm convinced that every word I write is golden and I won't need to edit--I can submit it to Harpercollins as soon as I type THE END.

And then I reread it...

[The_Grand_Duchess]

Way to bring this up from the bottoms! Yeah I think its best not to re write unless you have to fix something major. Otherwise you're likely to just get stuck in endless revisions without finishing anything at all.

[wayndom]

i've always heard the advice "don't rewrite until you've finished oyur first draft," but i find myself guilty of this.

sometimes it's just my perfectionism, but several times now i've found holes in the plot/ badly thought out parts that just need to be redone for me to continue. after rewriting chapter one, which i posted in "share your work," i am discarding chapter 2 because the plot contained therein simply doesn't work. i hit a dead-end in chapter 5 and i'm fixing up the beginning to help me past it.


My question to you is, how many novels have you completed?

[ishtar'sgate]

i've always heard the advice "don't rewrite until you've finished oyur first draft," but i find myself guilty of this.

sometimes it's just my perfectionism, but several times now i've found holes in the plot/ badly thought out parts that just need to be redone for me to continue.
is this normal practice?
Absolutely. Why wait until the end to fix mistakes you've found early on? That makes no sense at all. I rewrite and edit constantly. That's not perfectionism, that's respecting your craft.
Linnea

[ebrillblaiddes]

I went with option 4.

I edit the last few pages to remind myself of where I left off and what I was thinking, and to generally get the flow back. I've also chopped out huge infodumps when I realized they were there, sometimes before I write the first draft of the last scene, because I believe that whenever you find one you should kill it. I don't think major plot changes (I'm talking about stuff that's more than filling in the holes) should happen in the middle though--make a note of what you're thinking about changing, and get it down all one way, then change it if you need to, otherwise it's too easy to miss stuff (though if you're really good and it works for you, go with it).

[OverTheHills&FarAway]

My method involves me being crazy for several months, but gives me a good clean draft.

I get deep into character and write in spurts, contemplating the implications of my words.

And I get good results, with little problems to fix later. Just takes a LONG TIME

[Simple Living]

My question to you is, how many novels have you completed?

Touché. My point, exactly, to everyone who rewrites before finishing their first draft.

Each writer can do what they like, and there may be no "one way" to write, but that doesn't negate that there are certain statistics that prove true for most writers. One being that rewriting during the first draft is likely to lead to an unfinished first draft for most writers.

[Simple Living]

Absolutely. Why wait until the end to fix mistakes you've found early on? That makes no sense at all. I rewrite and edit constantly. That's not perfectionism, that's respecting your craft.
Linnea

A very disciplined, and most likely successful, writer may be able to do this, but it's not generally the case with most writers.

[JJ Cooper]

Touché. My point, exactly, to everyone who rewrites before finishing their first draft.

Each writer can do what they like, and there may be no "one way" to write, but that doesn't negate that there are certain statistics that prove true for most writers. One being that rewriting during the first draft is likely to lead to an unfinished first draft for most writers.

I musn't be 'part of the norm'. I continually edited and went back over parts of my novel as I wrote it. Kinda like two steps forward and one back. I found it very helpful in the way I write. And I just found out that I have very little editing to do now it's finished (just done two complete run throughs and I'm very happy with the results).

I don't get days at a time without interruption to sit and write my novels. I get at most a couple of hours a night. I also have to do my normal job that involves writing reports that are a different format to your average novel. So I need to read over whatever it was that I last wrote in my book to get me back into the feel and style, and mostly remind where I'm up to. While I'm still working my normal job I guess this won't change.

JJ

[Simple Living]

I musn't be 'part of the norm'. I continually edited and went back over parts of my novel as I wrote it. Kinda like two steps forward and one back. I found it very helpful in the way I write. And I just found out that I have very little editing to do now it's finished (just done two complete run throughs and I'm very happy with the results).

I don't get days at a time without interruption to sit and write my novels. I get at most a couple of hours a night. I also have to do my normal job that involves writing reports that are a different format to your average novel. So I need to read over whatever it was that I last wrote in my book to get me back into the feel and style, and mostly remind where I'm up to. While I'm still working my normal job I guess this won't change.

JJ

Congrats on the accomplishment, first and foremost! I'd agree that you aren't in the norm. There are exceptions to almost everything and I would say that you are one. The difference is your discipline. Many people have determination, but without discipline, very little gets accomplished.

Well done, JJ! Best wishes on the finished work!

[sadron]

the first one. I did that. :D

[aruna]

My rule was always not to rerwrite till first draft is finished. But I had to leave my WIP for two weeks and found I had lost momentum. When I got back to it it just made sense to start reading from the beginning (I'm 45000 words into it) and rewrite some things. By the time I arrive at the spot I left off I'll be into the story again.
So my vote is do what works.

[JJ Cooper]

My rule was always not to rerwrite till first draft is finished. But I had to leave my WIP for two weeks and found I had lost momentum. When I got back to it it just made sense to start reading from the beginning (I'm 45000 pages into it) and rewrite some things. By the time I arrive at the spot I left off I'll be into the story again.
So my vote is do what works.

No wonder you're getting lost. That's one big book. LOL.

JJ

[aruna]

No wonder you're getting lost. That's one big book. LOL.

JJ


Ooops!!:D

You know what I mean.

[aruna]

No wonder you're getting lost. That's one big book. LOL.

JJ


Ooops!!:D

You know what I mean.

[Pamster]

I went with the last choice because I don't believe that is anything but a mythical rule. ;) I can edit as I go and it helps me to pick the story back up like others have posted about doing. :)

[Rhea L]

I try not to get stuck in the rewrites. But occasionally, I will rewrite a part before reaching THE END - when the plot doesn't seem to be working out, and the gut feeling says I missed something important in the less than good parts of the WiP.

The current WiP suffered from that very problem twice. Resulted in my getting blocked until I went back, looked at it again, rewrote it properly and saw that the solution to the plot problems that got me blocked in the first place were missing in the original versions. I finally got it right when I forced myself to fix it.

Yes, I'm an organic writer. :P

[virtue_summer]

I think this is one of those rules, like any other rule, that needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The main purpose of the rule, the way I understand it, is to make sure you finish the novel. That's what matters. If you do that by revising as you go or by stopping before the story is completely finished and revising, it shouldn't matter, as long as you get there. I'm going to use myself as an example. I don't have trouble finishing stories in general. I've written three novels and a number of short stories, all completed. I don't outline and plot before I start a story. I began my current novel with a certain idea and, like most of my stories, it evolved into something else. That was fine at first. I made notes to go back to the beginning and make the necessary changes when I edited. I continued on. Then I got closer to the end, and realized that it was all wrong. I knew by now the way the story was supposed to be set up, and it didn't make sense with the ending I was writing. If I followed the advice I'd just end up writing a bunch of pages that I knew were going to be deleted, because the ending wouldn't make sense with the beginning and wouldn't be the story it was supposed to be. It wouldn't be true to the characters and the world I set up. Stephen King is known for not plotting but he's also known for describing a story as a found thing, as a fossil. That's how I feel about this story, that it's a fossil I was digging up and I veered away and instead of finishing digging up the fossil I ended up amassing a pile of dirt three feet away. So yeah, I think there are cases where it makes sense to go back and revise before you've finished a first draft. In my case, I need the revisions to get the story back on the right path so that I will get the right ending. It's not about line editing. It's not about procrastinating. It's about getting it back on the right track. Endings come from beginnings and middles, so if they're not right how can you expect to get the right ending? Seriously, rules are made to be broken. Do what feels right to you, not what someone else says. Every writer has their own process.