To Plot Or Not To Plot?
Hey everyone! Today I'm gonna be talking about writing.
I've been reading this ebook - How To Defeat Writers Block - So, it's saying, sometimes it's great to not plot at all - just write. And I'm thinking, yeah that might really work. But here's the thing;
Nearly all books you read to help with your novel are written by authors of contemporary. When you're just writing about the ups and downs of someone's life, with love, social problems or even crime, you can manage to do this.
But I write fantasy. Let's think, for example, about Sarah J Maas. There are so many clues in earlier books or chapters in both of her series, that when you find out something later on you're like "Of course, 'cos when..." In all the best YA fantasy and sci-fi, the plot is really complicated.
If I don't map my plot, there will be no surprises, "of course cos when..." s, unless I go back and put them in, or just write down the occasional note. No, I want this book to be FULL of "Of course!" s.
Back to contemporary. Ok, so there are often bits where you're like "That makes sense because before..." But it's not the same thing. Let's use a John Green book, Paper Towns, as an example. Margo left clues, so John Green must have known where she was from the beginning. I don't know what method he uses, of course, but for a book like this, it would be fine to just have the key points.
Even if you are writing fantasy or similar, if it were just one book you could get away with this, going back and putting in hints, etc.
But I want to write a trilogy. Maybe that's a bit much for my first project, but that's another subject altogether. I want to leave clues at the beginning of book one that is placed there carefully so something in book three makes sense. This approach to writing is not what's going to work for me.
How I'm going to do it; Put a rough outline on the first draft of my book, and when I've written that first draft, I'll look at the plot. I'll change it, and I'll carefully map the plot for the next two books. Then I can submit my finished book (once I've revised it loads) to a publisher and have no worries that if it gets published, I'll have forgotten to put a little clue in there. (obviously, I'll still have these worries.)
I'm sure my book won't get finished anytime soon, as a live a busy life, so maybe I'll change my approach as I go. For now, I know enough about my plot to just write.
If you think knowing less would help you but don't want to start a new piece of work, why don't you kill off a character or change some of the plotlines so you don't know where the story is going...
You might want to know everything about your story, but if you know every detail you might get bored of the writing itself. You might not be able to generate ideas that will make your story better. Consider this new approach!
Please leave comments and views on this subject.
I've been reading this ebook - How To Defeat Writers Block - So, it's saying, sometimes it's great to not plot at all - just write. And I'm thinking, yeah that might really work. But here's the thing;
Nearly all books you read to help with your novel are written by authors of contemporary. When you're just writing about the ups and downs of someone's life, with love, social problems or even crime, you can manage to do this.
But I write fantasy. Let's think, for example, about Sarah J Maas. There are so many clues in earlier books or chapters in both of her series, that when you find out something later on you're like "Of course, 'cos when..." In all the best YA fantasy and sci-fi, the plot is really complicated.
If I don't map my plot, there will be no surprises, "of course cos when..." s, unless I go back and put them in, or just write down the occasional note. No, I want this book to be FULL of "Of course!" s.
Back to contemporary. Ok, so there are often bits where you're like "That makes sense because before..." But it's not the same thing. Let's use a John Green book, Paper Towns, as an example. Margo left clues, so John Green must have known where she was from the beginning. I don't know what method he uses, of course, but for a book like this, it would be fine to just have the key points.
Even if you are writing fantasy or similar, if it were just one book you could get away with this, going back and putting in hints, etc.
But I want to write a trilogy. Maybe that's a bit much for my first project, but that's another subject altogether. I want to leave clues at the beginning of book one that is placed there carefully so something in book three makes sense. This approach to writing is not what's going to work for me.
How I'm going to do it; Put a rough outline on the first draft of my book, and when I've written that first draft, I'll look at the plot. I'll change it, and I'll carefully map the plot for the next two books. Then I can submit my finished book (once I've revised it loads) to a publisher and have no worries that if it gets published, I'll have forgotten to put a little clue in there. (obviously, I'll still have these worries.)
I'm sure my book won't get finished anytime soon, as a live a busy life, so maybe I'll change my approach as I go. For now, I know enough about my plot to just write.
If you think knowing less would help you but don't want to start a new piece of work, why don't you kill off a character or change some of the plotlines so you don't know where the story is going...
You might want to know everything about your story, but if you know every detail you might get bored of the writing itself. You might not be able to generate ideas that will make your story better. Consider this new approach!
Please leave comments and views on this subject.
Comments
Post a Comment