The discovery process strikes again...

[Phyrebrat]

I’d normally put this in a blog but ...

There’s an equal balance of planners/plotters and discovery writers on Chrons, and then there are a lot of us who are a miscegenation of both.

One of the (many) reasons my wip has been taking me so long (other than learning about the craft itself) is because i discovery-write and this has led to situations where I steam along them months or years later realise a fundamental improvement or problem and must rejig or even restart.

This morning, as I was writing I realised that two of my characters should actually be the same. (Sigh).

It doesn’t mean a massive rewrite of the 130k but 69k of it will.

I often wonder if the motivation to write comes from different places for the two different types of creatives.

Do plotters have a different ignition to discovery writers? I’m a teacher (dance) and find that process in education is far more valuable with challenging behaviour and learning than product. Even so we’re measuring success by product.

How do you view your process? You can’t divorce process as you’re constantly learning from your mistakes and successes.

Are different mental processes and subconscious outcomes at play in the two differing processes?

pH

 

[Stephen Palmer]

In recent years I’ve realised that what works best for me is to immerse myself without distractions for as long as possible when writing a first draft; this allows me to concentrate on the novel alone. I live it and nothing else for those days. The winter holiday is perfect – I can do fifteen chapters of twenty in that time (taking a day off to see my family on Christmas Day). After a while I return to manuscripts written like this to do editing, polishing, etc.

My goal is to get that first draft as right as possible. To convey the excitement and wonder I feel, I find it’s best for me to communicate excitement and wonder in the moment: first time, and often – usually, in fact – not knowing the exact details of plot and character. A second draft of a novel for me is never quite what a first draft is.

Of course, this method is high risk and doesn’t always work. I wouldn't recommend it to a writer recently starting out. I’ve got a few unpublished novels on my computer that will never see the light of day...

 

[Joshua Jones]

I do a bit of a hybrid approach. I extensively design the universe, then mix in broad strokes storylines and rough characters, and discover how the details fill out from there. I have one nearly complete novella (one or two more rounds of editing, and it should be ready for betas), and in that one, I had the main plot mapped out and the protagonist's personality finished, but some of the subplots didn't emerge until I was actually writing the thing, as well as character aspects like frequently used phrases and the like. So, I guess you could say at the 10,000 ft./3,000 meter level, I plan, but at the ground level, I discover.

I tried straight discovery once, in a 75 word challenge. It is the only time in my life I received the feedback that there seemed to be no rules to the universe in my story. It just doesn't work well for me. I am honestly the same way with learning languages. Many people like to learn a bunch of phrases, common questions, and so forth first before being "bored" with the grammar structure, but I can't learn a language like that. For me, I start with the grammar and fill in the vocabulary as I go.

So, all that to say, straight discovery doesn't work for me, nor does straight planning. A hybrid is the best for my odd brain.

 

[sknox]

I do think there is a different sort of mental process that goes on. I don't for a moment believe there is a clear line between planning and discovery writing, but when I am in planning mode, I'm in God mode. I'm looking down on the story from above. I'm working out logistics, choosing the setting (mine are all historical), lots of research, etc. I'm also goal-oriented: I want to see that plot arc completed, the character list set, and in general to get to an ill-defined starting line so I can start writing.

When I'm writing, I'm at the character's shoulder. I'm looking at the world from ground-level, as it were, rather than from on high. I concentrate far more on sensations and feelings, and far from rushing I try to slow down as much as I can. I'm aiming for real-time.

It's also down in the trenches that I trip over mistakes I made in the planning--crucial details I left out, consequences I did not consider. At that point, it's usually the story that re-engineers the planning; it's not often that the outline forces me to rewrite a chapter. Early in the writing--especially the first couple of chapters--there's a sort of DMZ between the two modes. Lots of major rewriting happens there.

Anyway, the big division for me is that no matter how much I try to pay attention to character arc and motivation, the planning stage is mostly strategy. Once I'm writing, no matter how hard I try to pay attention to me careful outline and my extensive notes, it's all tactics.

 

[Joshua Jones]

I do think there is a different sort of mental process that goes on. I don't for a moment believe there is a clear line between planning and discovery writing, but when I am in planning mode, I'm in God mode. I'm looking down on the story from above. I'm working out logistics, choosing the setting (mine are all historical), lots of research, etc. I'm also goal-oriented: I want to see that plot arc completed, the character list set, and in general to get to an ill-defined starting line so I can start writing.

When I'm writing, I'm at the character's shoulder. I'm looking at the world from ground-level, as it were, rather than from on high. I concentrate far more on sensations and feelings, and far from rushing I try to slow down as much as I can. I'm aiming for real-time.

It's also down in the trenches that I trip over mistakes I made in the planning--crucial details I left out, consequences I did not consider. At that point, it's usually the story that re-engineers the planning; it's not often that the outline forces me to rewrite a chapter. Early in the writing--especially the first couple of chapters--there's a sort of DMZ between the two modes. Lots of major rewriting happens there.

Anyway, the big division for me is that no matter how much I try to pay attention to character arc and motivation, the planning stage is mostly strategy. Once I'm writing, no matter how hard I try to pay attention to me careful outline and my extensive notes, it's all tactics.

It sounds like we approach things in much the same way. They say great minds think alike, so this similarity should be of great concern to you right about now...

 

[tinkerdan]

Depending on your definition of discovery writing--the character problem you mention should not happen all that often.

What I mean is that in some definitions the Discovery Writer has solidly planned characters and if your characters are well developed then there should be real problem trying to give one character the attributes of two characters.

However when you say plotter and discovery writers it makes me wonder if its plotters and pantsers once again. However pantsers don't have to fit the above definition of discovery writer.

Honestly I think all writers are discovery writers.

Either way I think that most authors are plotters of some sort even if they keep the whole thing in their heads.
And the plotters worst enemy is a rigid adherance to the outline(which renders any discover writing improbable).

As to characters-- for most of my characters it would be difficult to consider fusing two major character together; though it might be conceivable for the insertion of one character into another character's position in a scene, both to cut down on excess characters and to augment the scene with some of the attributes of that character. (If it doesn't alter the scene when doing that, then you might have two characters that look sound and feel the same and that could be an indication of something else.)

The thing is that once you have a sound idea of what a character is and how they act and react, it works better to have some form of discovery writing in your narrative; because sometimes your character just wouldn't do what you planned on having them do.(This is probably the single truth that my betas have been able to help me with, when they point out that they just don't think that character would do that.[Usually they are correct].)

 

[Brian G Turner]

this has led to situations where I steam along them months or years later realise a fundamental improvement or problem and must rejig or even restart.

I remember someone quoting at me that writing is more about rewriting. It's frustrating but it's true.

 

[sknox]

>The thing is that once you have a sound idea of what a character is and how they act and react,

Aye, and there's the rub. I can (and have) put in many hours developing my characters. Plenty of backstory, snippets of dialog, all the basic descriptive stuff. Some of it sticks, some doesn't.

In the case of my WIP, my MC is female human. She's not going to become a male dwarf. She longs to be a scientific journalist, and that hasn't changed. But her age slides around considerably. Sometimes she has traveled extensively, sometimes she hasn't (right now, it's just not significant). She's published a few articles; oh, no she hasn't.

This plasticity comes from her relations with the other characters, and that only plays out during that discovery phase (also called writing). Surely if one can be discovering setting, plot, theme, one can also be discovering character.

For me, all of it is in the nature of the artist's sketch. It's the cartone prior to the actual painting--a necessary and conditioning step, but not a defining one, if I've picked the right gerundives here.

I have plenty of sound ideas. I can usually find them twisted and in flames, somewhere in the wake of the actual story.

 

[Shorewalker]

I do think there are different mind-sets involved and I wonder whether there are two over-riding difference in mental make-up?

One is the difference between creation and imagination. Some people will love to emerse themselves in the nuts-and-bolts of their invention, putting all the pieces together, rounding some edges here, cutting a few slices off there. It will be fully built and ready to hit the road before a word is written in anger. The only problem with this is that there is no stress-testing and once you let your characters loose with your fine machine, the little buggers go and break it.

The imaginators, if you like, have got some half-arsed notions that possibly might hang together, but they don't want to be constrained and so allow their imagination to run riot. Nothing gets broken, but halfway through the journey, they discover that they've got a flat and nobody thought to included a spare wheel.

The other difference is simply...who's got the patience? World-building, character design, creation of an alien language...all are brilliant and can really enrich a world...but goddammit, I want to write Chapter One!!!

I'm a pantser and managed some character outlines, a brief history of how we got to where we are, the names of a few kingdoms...and the end of the story.

Then I put my foot to the floor and so far, I need a bit of work on the bodywork, but the thing's still running.

Somehow.

 

[The Big Peat]

I swing through the various methods like a pendulum depending on mood and what I want to learn about storytelling at that particular moment. It also helps keep things fresh. Writing is a slog at times and there's times when plotting/pantsing/whatever feels fresh and new and fun because I haven't done it in a while.

That said, I lean more towards plotting, largely because I can't help myself from thinking forwards about a piece and expanding on it. That doesn't mean I don't find myself discovering a lot of new things about the plot once I start writing though - which is why I tend to write some of the story pantsing straight away, just to see what happens (something I was doing a bit before I read about Pratchett doing it and realised why I was doing it).

 

[HareBrain]

That said, I lean more towards plotting, largely because I can't help myself from thinking forwards about a piece and expanding on it. That doesn't mean I don't find myself discovering a lot of new things about the plot once I start writing though

You've described my own process better than I ever have.

 

[sknox]

I get the attraction of simplifying writing into pants and plots, but how many folks do you know who do one or the other exclusively? The distinction, or at least the emphasis on the distinction, is overblown and misleading.

Getting a complete book written is a weaving of skills--a symphony or at least a jazz ensemble. In the planning stage I inevitably wind up writing--if that's not too grand a word--snippets of dialog or description. It's an odd slippage: a paragraph might start out with some research notes, include a question or two from me, a bit of speculation as to how the information might be used, and the next thing you know I'm writing dialog. I'm willing to have it dismissed as a lack of discipline on my part, but sometimes what I want to capture is not merely the fact or the plot point, but a feeling or sensation that arose in the moment, something no exposition can capture. So I fall back, as it were, to writing.

It's all still planning, though. Notes, facts, plot points, snippets, images, none of it goes directly into the writing document. I am, to continue the metaphor, just assembling the instruments and tuning up.

Planning continues during writing. So does research. So, even, does editing, as I decide to delete or rewrite whole passages. There's editing, too, taking place as I type up my initial (hand written) draft, usually at the level of word choice but sometimes a little more ambitious.

I am not one of those writers who can start at page one and write a draft straight through. I get stuck or bored and often jump forward, even whole chapters at a time. Sometimes it's to sort out some big action scene. In the course of writing, it comes clear that earlier, already written scenes, need tweaking so as to better set up that action scene. Those big scenes, too, are usually identified only in a general way during planning; when it comes to writing them, I very often have to stop and block out the action like a director in a play. Planning at that level of detail initially is largely a waste of time.

Then there's Second Draft, which is often as much a writing effort as the First Draft, though technically it would be editing. At the second and third drafts, planning--as in checking the plan--and writing happen nearly simultaneously, as I'm often rewriting scenes to iron out consistency errors as much as to add depth and drama.

Once I emerge with a finished project, the fervent discussions about plotter versus pantser seem irrelevant. There remains the complex process followed by each writer, a process that winds up being different with each new project anyway.

PS and FWIW, I don't much like the term "discovery" writer, either. It feels like I don't know what I'm doing, I'm just poking around discovering things. I know, I know; the unease is probably just me. I did say FWIW.

 

[The Big Peat]

You've described my own process better than I ever have.

Do you also find yourself struggling to write scenes where you don't know roughly what's happening already?

 

[HareBrain]

You could probably have ended that question at "scenes". Or "struggling".

 

[The Big Peat]

You could probably have ended that question at "scenes". Or "struggling".

Permit me the optimism of specificity.

 

[Guillermo Stitch]

You could probably have ended that question at "scenes". Or "struggling".

Or even 'yourself'.

 

[SamThomas]

I've been through the novel-writing process a few times, and what you're going through sounds very familiar to me. My first book had waaay too many characters. I meet someone, I think they're interesting, and that they should be in the book. Then I discover that they're distracting, unnecessary, or unnecessary distractions. In the end, I think I killed off four or five named characters. After that, I was much more judicious when choosing to add someone.

The other interesting change was that for my first book, I jumped around a great deal, writing the scenes that inspired me and then stitching them together. The first was a great deal of fun. The latter a real drag. Since then, I've been much more linear in my writing. I have set-pieces that I know are going to be in the book, but I usually don't write them until I get to that point of the text.

As far as revisions go, I tend to omit a lot of the character development the first time through, focusing on plot. When I rewrite (adding about 30%), it's interior stuff, reactions to events, and relationships.

I'm also on board with Big Peat and Harebrain: I plot stuff out, but often find myself getting to the original destination by a surprising route, or ending up in a different place altogether. When the characters surprise me, I know I'm doing something right.

 

[Dan Jones]

That said, I lean more towards plotting, largely because I can't help myself from thinking forwards about a piece and expanding on it. That doesn't mean I don't find myself discovering a lot of new things about the plot once I start writing though - which is why I tend to write some of the story pantsing straight away, just to see what happens (something I was doing a bit before I read about Pratchett doing it and realised why I was doing it).

You've described my own process better than I ever have.

I second that. I find that without some sort of plotting, me inner verbosity kicks in and I find myself meandering slightly too much. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with the odd literary daunder, but ensuring one keeps to the train of the story is essential, and probably makes writing more efficient (and therefore bearable).

FWIW the way I've tended to approach things is that I've come up with a few key milestone plot points, or scenes, that may occur at various stages in the story, and then try to find ways to stitch the various scenes together. So I roughly know where I'm going to end up, but I find out the route as I'm travelling it.

Ph, the more I think about it, I'm not sure that trying to categorise writers as plotters / pantsters / discoverers / architects / gardeners etc is that useful. Even if one is being highly regimented and formulaic about the approach to a story, there's still an element of alchemy involved the because words still have to fall out of your mind onto the page. At that point you have to kind of allow yourself to be led by whatever light or guide is living in your subconscious. That sort of gestalt practice that isn't easily categorisable.

 

[Shorewalker]

FWIW the way I've tended to approach things is that I've come up with a few key milestone plot points, or scenes, that may occur at various stages in the story, and then try to find ways to stitch the various scenes together. So I roughly know where I'm going to end up, but I find out the route as I'm travelling it.

This is pretty much the entirity of my outline. There are key scenes/revelations that hold the over-arcing story together and these I know inside and out.

The rest of it seems to consist of letting the characters know where they're supposed to be and when and letting them find their own way. Had to send the search parties out a couple of times, but so far, it appears to have worked out.

 

[Cathbad]

Outline?

I've just been looking over my outline for the story I'm currently working on. I've included, so far, the things I've meant to... but not in the order I envisioned!

I don't think my characters like following the outline.