By way of reader orientation, this post is built on the premise that the universe of writers is divided into two broad categories–those who outline their stories before they get to the business of writing, and those who plow into the story on page one, not knowing where it’s going to go until they get there. That latter group writes by the seat of their pants, ergo they are “pantsers,” and I number myself among them.
In my mind, there really are not pros and cons to be discussed about one approach versus the other because the preferred approach is writer-specific and hard-wired. I’ve never been able to outline. Even in high school and college, when I was supposed to turn in those damn 3×5 cards along with research papers, I always did them last, after I had written the paper. And story wheels? They make my head explode. This is why writing programs like Scrivener, which so many of my writer friends love, are wasted on me.
Two weeks ago, my post here in the ‘Zone dealt with the perils of pantsing a short story–specifically, how it spun out of control in terms of length. I stipulate that if outlining-then-writing worked for me, that would have been a far more efficient approach. But in the end, my pantsing worked. Once I discovered the real story, I was able to trim off about 2,500 words and turned in a tale I’m quite proud of.
Last weekend, I attended an excellent conference called Creatures, Crimes and Creativity in Columbia, MD, outside of Baltimore. The first panel I was put on was about screenwriting–a format that is very strictly structured. You’ve got 120 pages to tell an entire story for a feature film. Around 20 pages for a half hour TV show, and you’ve got to pace for commercial breaks! (Full disclosure: I’ve written feature films, but I’ve done nothing with television.)
Perhaps the most noted guru in screenwriting instruction is Syd Field, and his teachings clearly influenced the advice given by my fellow panelists. By Page X you have to have the inciting event (or whatever it’s called), and then by page Y must come the turning point(?). Et cetera, et cetera, and on and on. Pantsing a screenplay, they said, is not possible.
Enter the contrarian. C’est moi. Of course you can pants your way through a screenplay. That’s how I find the story. The characters interact with each other, they do stuff and say things, and through that, the creative crew in my mind wakes up and gets excited. I’ll hammer out something that is jumbled and woefully long, but I’ll have a whole story. It’ll be crap, but first drafts are supposed to be crap.
Now that I know the story and I’m excited by the dialogue, future drafts are all about shaping the pile of poo first draft into the beautiful golden structure of a screenplay that works.
It bothers me that inexperienced writers attend classes and take what they hear literally. As a story is first unfolding, I think it would be soul stealing to think that a certain plot point had to happen by page 10. First drafts are all about story flow. Don’t let artificial structures get in the way of your imagination. Get it all out, then fix it later.
To be clear: Structure is king in the world of screenplays, and I’m not suggesting otherwise. I’m merely suggesting that you should not let those structural concerns clog your imagination.
If I had to outline a story, I wouldn’t write. Finding out what happens next is the fun of writing. My various stories have gone in some wild directions that never would have occurred to me, had I sat down and wrote out an outline.
You’re not quite the contrarian you say you are, Brother Gilstrap. You’re not aginst Syd Field type structure, just thinking about it when finding the story. I agree. I also agree that for the “pantser” structure comes in at some point to fix the “pile of poo.”
Whether you plan or pants, you have to allow for and encourage the imagintion to “flow.” I get that in spades as I’m “blueprinting” (the word “outline” brings out the 1a.b. 2a.b. idea from high school, so I prefer the more creative “blueprint”). I have a lot less poo to deal with that way.
So it’s all about the way you are “wired” to coax out “story.” But after the coaxing, if you want to sell, you better know how to make that story gripping and accessible to readers, and that’s when structure becomes your best friend.
Pantsing is why I hated creative writing in school – I couldn’t write on an assigned topic to save my soul. After surviving my last English class in College I waited three decades to try writing. Thankfully, Stephen King’s memoir clued me in about pantsing or I would have likely never figured it out. I have four books on my writing bookshelf on outlining and I can’t follow any of them. Scrivener looks like a writing nightmare to me. For my 26th WIP, I got through 20K words before I had a clue who the murderer might be. Pantsers unite!
Do I wish I could wake up with a fully plotted story in my head? Yes. Does it happen? No.
I don’t mind pantsing–it’s like being in a maze bumping into walls and figuring out how to turn around and go at it again. I would say the only time it’s a bit frustrating is when your story turns out shorter then you thought it would be. But that’s what rewriting is for.
I never aspired to be a writer, so when I thought it might be ‘fun’ (ran out of room for needlepoint projects), I started writing just to see what happened. Now, over 30 novels later, I’m stuck in that ‘discover first’ set.
I just finished reading Lee Child’s intro essays to his books, and he says he never looks back. Writes a sentence, then the next, then the next. Sometimes he’ll start with a name and go from there. Or a location. Works for him. Jeffrey Deaver spends 8 months on his ‘outline’ (which I’d consider my first draft, which takes me less than that by far.)
Well, I’m not a full-blown outliner, but I need to know my main turning points up front. Just the big 3-4. Then I can imaginate my way to and through them. And I just finished my first screenplay (feature spec), and, as you correctly say, John, structure is king for scripts. Since my first is an adaptation of one of my novels, the structure was already in place. One challenge was cutting 300 pages down to 120. And making it “filmic” vs. novelistic, which is whole other topic.
I’m a panster too and I love Scrivener. Of course, I don’t use the outline or corkboard stuff. I just write in scenes, label them loosely, sometimes just with the pov, and then fix it. I’ve had to write synopses when writing for a publisher but usually I write something super loose that looks like it would work, and then put it away and don’t look at it again. Early on I had to write the whole book, then the synopsis, which is harder to me than you might think.
Scrivener works for me. I just have to adapt it to the way I write.
Great points, Eve! Keep it loose, so you have room to wiggle.
I’ll always remember from back in the early days about 100 books ago, I used to write 20-25 page synopses. And I’d panic if it got too far astray because in progress a better answer occurred. Then one day I got into a conversation with my brilliant editor at the time, who said “You know, it’s not like I dig out the synopsis and compare it to the manuscript when it comes in.”
And I, the newbie was like, “Oh.”
My synopses for the publishers I have to do them for are now anywhere from three paragraphs to three pages. My Indie stuff is dive in and swim and see where I end up.
An interesting post today. Considering that I am highly structured, planner, when I read ‘you can’t pants a screenplay’ my first thought was, sure you can. Can you meander for 30,000 words? Probably not. Can you know that ‘Ricky and his cat need to find the USB stick with the bitcoin code before the terrorists can buy an A bomb with the money’ and pants what happens in between, yep?
To quote Ensign Lefler, who won’t say this for 400 years, “You gotta go with what works.”
Another pantser here. I tried Scrivener but it made as much sense to me as algebra, which made no sense at all.
Are outliners more efficient than pantsers? Probably. But writing an outline feels unnatural and would take as long, if not longer, to shoehorn a story into that format.
That said, I like to brainstorm with a very organized, structured, outlining lawyer friend. She helps me rearrange my wild hare ideas into logical sense. I help her be more spontaneous. We complement each other and work together very well. Yin and yang.
I started as an outliner but jumped ship after six books and am now a pantser. I found that once I produced an outline, I knew the story, and the writing became a chore. I was bored with it. Even though I rarely followed the outline completely–so I asked myself–why bother? Now everyday is a discovery, and though it can get messy, it’s always fixable in rewrites. Good job, John
Thank you for this post, John.
Brains are so different, one from the other. The first book I wrote was published by a big NY publishing house. I knew nothing about structure, or how one was ‘supposed’ to write, but it apparently worked. Was it a best seller? Not even close. But my book was in bookstores and I had over 400 people at my first book signing.
I decided to study writing. I attended classes, bought books and online courses, and tried to twist my mind into structured thinking. So many of these used movies as proof, but I didn’t know until now that screenwriting requires a set structure. Books don’t. It’s easy to recognize a book written to the formula, and I find myself looking for the points. Wait for it…yep, there it is. I’ve tried breaking down my favorite books to fit the blueprint, but haven’t been able to get one that fits.
Are many bestselling books written to structure? Of course. But there are just as many that aren’t. Spending years trying to make my brain conform to plotting out points led me to think I just didn’t have what it takes to be a novelist. But I kept writing, because I can’t not write, and I somehow managed to complete several more. I’m happy to know there are very successful writers whose minds work like mine.
We must use what works for us, but…. Pantsing friends who became successful writers with tight deadlines often came to me over the years to figure out outlining because they didn’t have time to do massive rewrites. Getting it mostly right the first time saves lots of time.
I’ve always used a mix of the two methods. I get all the major plot points down then fill in the rest as I write. I compare it to having a line of jewels then creating the filigree that ties them into a bracelet.
Plantser here. I usually have an idea of the plot, but not a detailed outline. As I write, I may outline a little ahead, but then the writing overtakes the outlining. I call it iterative development.
Great post. Thanks, John.
Iterative development—great term!