Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

I was wondering about the process other authors use to write. I only wrote three books and haven't worked out my personal process yet, but its coming together.

I usually think of a theme (social, philosophical or political issue), study it, prepare a preliminary outline, research the characters and decide on their names/personalities, develop the outline further and then write. I repeat this process for each book part (usually 5 chapters) because I found out that I get bored once I complete the whole book outline.

The process depends on the genre, actually. I write medieval science fiction -- which means i have to do a LOT of research to make that work.

For the most part, I create a basic outline in my head, then do whatever world building and research I need to in order to get going, and after that, let the characters take me where they want to go. Often that means stopping and doing more research along the way. But that has really paid off for me.

As part of the research I did to introduce Lord Engineer Kian in "Ghosts," I actually found a big scientific error in a Star Trek Voyager episode (season 4, "Day of Honor"). The episode has a race that powers their systems with thorium isotopes. By coincidence, Beinarian "argene" is thorium 232, so I had to learn a fair bit about it when I started talking about star craft engines. Thorium is a highly radioactive metal used in nuclear power plants. It's not exactly safe to pick up with your bare hands. So why didn't the Voyager crew use safety gear when handling it? Not even gloves! And no radiation burns from touching it?


That was a stupid mistake on their part and exactly why you have to research constantly. Someone like me is likely to notice!

I just get an idea and go with it.

I don't bother with plans or anything like that, though I've done research if it's for historical fiction.

Michael wrote: "I just get an idea and go with it.

I don't bother with plans or anything like that, though I've done research if it's for historical fiction."

I'm with Michael on this one, I write both SF and Fantasy, so in each case I have a mental picture of 'the world'.
Once I've got that I've got a vague outline of the story, and with that I just start writing. This will inevitably throw up questions I need answers for, the answers will equally inevitably throw up fresh ideas I'd never even thought about and the book will slowly come together

Step 1: Open a bottle of vodka.
Step 2. Open a bottle of single malt.
Step 3: Fetch the tray of ice cubes.
Step 4: Drink according to scene requirements.
Step 5: Keep going until out of liquor.
Step 6: Eat carbs.
Step 7: Pass out.
Step 8: Repeat as necessary.

There are those who feel an organic process is best, and they just write what comes. They have a vague idea of what the story outline will be in their heads, and then they put it in hard format.

Personally I think this is a rather clumsy way of writing, and comes with inherent drawbacks. Without specific notes, characters can become unwieldy and inconsistent. Traits that are set in the first part of the book can be forgotten, and contradicted in later parts of the writing. This is particularly true with novel length works. It can also be very difficult to keep track of plot and sub-plot points, ancillary and minor characters, terms, definitions, and other points that enrich your writing for the reader.

Without a specific plan, you can find yourself not knowing how to progress a plot, or find yourself with a hasty ending. This leads the reader unfulfilled and rightfully wanting more. It can also lead to problems with conflicts with reality. As an earlier post pointed out that research is key for certain genres. If you fail to do your research, you can alienate your audience. I knew an armature historic fiction novelist who didn't do his research properly, and consequently put a desert in western Montana (a fact that could easily be checked using Google Earth). Hint, there isn't one.

I start with a paragraph, and then elaborate until I have a few paragraphs. From there I can extend the story as far as I want, and create an entire series arc, which allows me to maintain consistency and foreshadowing throughout the entire series. I also maintain a document that lists every plot point, term, named character, and history with as much detail as I can. That way if I forget what color someone's eyes are I don't have to search the whole document to find it.

Programs like Scrivener can assist with this, but I prefer my way, and everyone has their own way. My process helps me eliminate plot holes and inconsistencies that would otherwise detract from my reader's enjoyment.

Having a plan does not negate the organic nature of my writing. I think of it as a living, fluid, general guide. It isn't written in stone. If I feel inspired to take a different direction, I'm free to do so. The documentation helps me make changes and keep the overall story consistent, without having to resort to gimmicks to patch the plot holes.

That is my way of thinking, and it works for me. You can do it anyway that suits you. It's your writing, not mine. I hope that helps

Aaron wrote: "There are those who feel an organic process is best, and they just write what comes. They have a vague idea of what the story outline will be in their heads, and then they put it in hard format.

P..."

I write organically, but I also write a lot of stuff down as it is created. You can see that at http://www.peersofbeinan.com/Princess... where I actually post the genealogy that I worked out connecting Princess Anlei from book one to Princess Anyu (her descendent) from books two and the unwritten three. I was constantly drawing these relationships out and had to for book two which spans four generations filled with feudal nobles who tend to be related to each other somehow -- just as they are in any monarchy.

Writing organically doesn't mean you do not write things down or that you are wrought with inconsistencies. It means that you do not try to work it all out before you start writing. I found that the ending I planned from the outset was not at all the ending I wrote and that I deferred certain revelations to the the opening chapter of book three.

My best work is in what I did NOT plan from the outset. In my experience, inspiration is like that!

I think Laurel has grasped the point that to write 'organically' you have to have a real feel for the background. I don't plan, but I can tell you a dozen different sorts of cheeses and reel off an even larger number of wines that are available in various parts of the world.

I write a synopsis that would make me want to read a book.

I begin writing in those outlines.

I rewrite the ending 3 different ways to see how it works (I ended up using all 3 in my upcoming novel Puppets - yes. 3 different endings, and they all fit the story and even open it up for a second book)

Edit etc.

I HATE research, but if it's needed I'll do it along the way.

Josiah wrote: "I write a synopsis that would make me want to read a book.

I begin writing in those outlines.

I rewrite the ending 3 different ways to see how it works (I ended up using all 3 in my upcoming nove..."


You hate research? Okay, I hope you do not write historical anything! I ran a poll on LinkedIn with other members of Phi Alpha Theta (that's the honor society for history majors and BA/MA/PhD in history) on biggest peeves in fiction. Research was the number one peeve and the biggest turn off when done poorly.


I write assuming everyone else is as quick to find factual errors as I am. Like Federation star ships in Star Trek not using any sort of precaution against radiation when handling the very radioactive metal thorium. You really think you can touch thorium without getting burned or worse? Hell no! Plutonium, uranium, and thorium are the three top metals for generating nuclear power. DO NOT TOUCH bare handed!

How do I know that? RESEARCH! I'm not an engineer; I'm just really good at looking up engineering information and very nice to engineers who usually like being asked fifty thousand questions about their work. :)

I sit down. I write and don't think about it (I am queen of the crappy first drafts). When I need to know something, I look it up.

That's pretty much it until revisions.

I go walking most days and that's when I think up my characters, plots, stories. Once the main character has popped into my head, I think up what her/his life will be like and what problems he/she will have. Then as soon as I arrive home, I start writing. I don't have to think too hard because my stories just unfold. I keep notes of days, times, personalities, places, characters ect, then when the story's finished, I go through it to make sure there aren't any inconsistencies.

Once I have my characters, scenes, plots, I go back and add more personality to each character. When that's all done, I edit it over and over until I'm happy with it. I have never, ever been bored while writing or editing my stories, and usually I have to make myself stop at some point or they'd go on too long. But there's always a sequel :) I love those as I already know the characters.

I write for the joy of it--creating as I go is what keeps me going. I go back and review often, making changes here and there, cleaning up plot points, language, descriptions, events--the process is very organic for me. If I had to make outlines, do research, have everything planned out before I ever started writing--I wouldn't write. It takes the fun of discovering new things about my characters and living each moment as they do. I write for ME and if other people like it too that's great. But I seldom if ever plan what I am going to write--I let my books write themselves.

I come up with an initial idea, usually involving a couple of characters, and an initial feeling, then I figure out what might cause that feeling. I spend a couple of days going over the various plot ideas, and then when I have a chance, I sit down and begin writing. I have pauses when I'm stuck, and not sure how to get the characters to the point I've planned for the end, but usually I can work my way through them.

I think the idea that you can't have a story that is coherent without planning is wrong. I have an idea in my head of the main story arc (I write romances, to there is a reasonably standard way it goes), but I don't write it down, and it's completely subject to change.

I write fantasy and thriller. Usually in my fantasy worlds, the necessary research WILL be done -- however with my most recent novel, Puppets, there's a rather huge plot twist at the end that necessitated research on a plot device that isn't mentioned in the novel until the last three chapters -- and yet this plot twist has shaped the whole book beforehand.

i do mostly just what Rinelle described. i think it's the best way to keep me interested while i'm writing the stories.

Patricia wrote: "I go walking most days and that's when I think up my characters, plots, stories. Once the main character has popped into my head, I think up what her/his life will be like and what problems he/she ..."

Walking works for me as well, you can really chew over the details, I've even been known to jot things down :-)

It seems that most of you here are somewhat of a discovery-type writers. I personally understand that it keeps you interested in the book you are preparing which, for some people, is critical for the completion of a project.

Good point. Yes, if I knew all that was going to happen I'd be bored as well :-)

This is one of Brandon Sanderson's lectures - for those who don't know him he is a Fantasy author working for Tor publishing - where he discusses types of writers. He divides the type of writers between two major categories, outliners and discoverers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glPLTN...

I don't plan at all. When I have an idea the whole story comes to me in flash and somehow it gets lodged in my brain so I don't forget it. Also other little details come in, like scenes and bits of dialogue so then I just write it and flesh it out as I go.

I have to at least loosely plan the final chapter/scene. I don't mind the characters finding their own way through the story, but I have to know where they going ultimately.

I write fantasy, and I am planning a science fiction story as well.

My process learned after completing my first trilogy:

Imagine my loose concept--"It's going to be a story about A1 going to B2 and all hell breaks loose until C3 gets F4'd"

I like Shakespeare's 5 act story construction as a loose guideline for the dramatic arc. My take on it is:
1. establish the problem
2. come up with a plan to fix problem
3. Uh oh! The plan fails or compounds the problem
4. pick up the pieces and dig deep for the true fix
5. execute final plan

This is a general dramatic arc for the whole novel or series, but each subpart can also run through a similar or partial treatment.

Coming up with the problem is first, followed immediately by coming up with the final solution, even if a partial fix is all that can happen. I boil both of these down to a simple statement like, problem-The God of Undeath is going to destroy the world and all life upon it. Solution-Use all the power of life that can be mustered to stop him.

I then created the intervening moments with the same level of detail: The Plan-create the hero that can stop the God of Undeath. The Uh Oh-There is another opponent of the hero who must be dealt with first.
The new plan-The hero must gather all the life that remains to have a chance of winning.

Then I work on my characters:
I build up my characters until they are alive in my head, a sort of compartmentalized roleplaying. This involves sketching out their likeness so that I can picture them. To define who they are as people, I need to know how they will react in given situations and how they view the world past the end of their own nose. This takes the form of mental and written notes and an interview process I put them through. My goal being to create an individual who feels genuine, and it is just a starting point because the story will further shape them.

I then write a loose outline that connects characters and events together. They all must grow, even though some are going to grow towards the negative and lose some of what makes them sympathetic to the reader.

It is the characters who really fill in the details as I flesh out the story, they see the conflicts from very different perspectives. In the case of my trilogy, the Uh Oh of act 3 was different for everyone. Even the initial problem was not equally understood by all characters until deep into act 4.

I love this part 'Imagine my loose concept--"It's going to be a story about A1 going to B2 and all hell breaks loose until C3 gets F4'd'

Hi everyone,
I tend to start by writing s synopsis and I work my way there. Before starting to write, I take 20 small pieces of paper and write a main plot on each paper. That why, I already knoe the flow and structure of my story. I just need to fill in the minor details. Wishing you allq the best.

Looks like I'm in the minority by always coming up with quite a detailed plan for my horror stories but I do tend to choose who lives or dies completely at random.

I tend to grab onto an idea and then run with it. It depends upon how much research I have to do along the way as to what kind of story it is and how much is outside my realm of knowledge (which is often quite a bit!). Also, to get to know my main characters better, I actually draw sketches while imagining who they are, so later on, when I'm writing or revising, if something doesn't quite ring true for that character, I can refer to the sketch and know then if he/she would act or react in such a manner. I also read my entire work aloud, often acting out certain scenes as necessary (which causes some consternation within my dog as she watches me). I have countless notebooks filled with reference notes, and have a thesaurus, three different dictionaries, and two writing/editing rule books (all well thumbed through) right beside my computer. And even as careful as I try to be, I still make errors. :(

For my current book, the sequel to The Spirit of A Witch, I came up with the main ideas first (I carry around a notebook so I can jot down any random ideas) then I worked out the start and the ending. After that I broke down the events leading up to the ending, expanded the beginning until everything overlapped. I then took all the minor ideas and added those in where appropriate. Once that was done I had an overview which was broken up into rough chapters. Next step was to add date and time to each scene. I had to do that because large sections of the book are time critical. But I'm still flexible on my overview; it's not too detailed, so when I have any better ideas (which I have so far), I'll go back and add them in.

Lee wrote: "Looks like I'm in the minority by always coming up with quite a detailed plan for my horror stories but I do tend to choose who lives or dies completely at random."

I prepare detailed outlines too, but split my books into somewhat-independent parts.

I love listening to music so what ends up happening is when a song comes on that I feel needs to be written out into a story that's what I will do. I only published one book so far Shattered

But I am constantly writing and it's always when I'm listening to music....I just let the music take me where the characters of my writing wants to go.

Well first off I wish I had the approach and mindset that Shakespeare or Poe had, they seemed like they had could write on the spot all day any day. For me it depends on what I have boiling for an idea in my brain. If I have a good concept with plot, characters and a central idea I sit down and go with it for as long as I can until I have to stop and think of more. My approach however is to take things step by step and make sure I don't overthink or write too much. It's hard to write when tired with half thoughts. Slow and steady with a general idea works for me.

I find that even if I haven't planned, I always know where the characters are going to end up. Then again, I change the ending as I go sometimes if I can't sustain a certain thread long enough to get out of the after Novella - before Novel space.

Luckily for me, as a discovery writer, each book of my series is completely different thematically.

Nicole: I find I do that as well. In fact, so much so that I'm putting together a choreography version of my work-in-progress novel Encore.

I get a "what if" idea and struggle to develop a one- or two-sentence description of the story. I work on a premise and what it is I want to say. Then I plot and replot. Depending on the story, I do whatever research is necessary for authenticity. Writing begins only after I have the ending worked out. I may not use that ending, but I like the thought of having one before I begin. My latest novel ended nowhere near where I expected it to.

Crazy, right?

I write what I would enjoy reading. I think of a premise and then attempt to write it, chapter 1-chapter x. Timeskips get rough as I feel the need to show pretty much everything that might be going on. After all, characters have lives outside of plot, character-establishing actions, right?

I have a new approach to writing that's rather like the saying grabbing a bull by the horns. Grab a pencil or pen and paper and write away! Or park your butt on the chair and type away on that keyboard like theres no tomorrow!

Justin wrote: "I have a new approach to writing that's rather like the saying grabbing a bull by the horns. Grab a pencil or pen and paper and write away! Or park your butt on the chair and type away on that keyb..."

That's what I refer to as discovery-type writing approach. It is great to keep you interested in what your working on imo.

Start writing, write write write write write. Finish it. Leave it for two months. Go back, draft draft draft draft draft, Leave it for a few weeks. Go back, despair, despair, despair. Buy vodka, drink drink drink drink drink dri-

Jason wrote: "Start writing, write write write write write. Finish it. Leave it for two months. Go back, draft draft draft draft draft, Leave it for a few weeks. Go back, despair, despair, despair. Buy vodka, dr..."

I need to try try try try try this!

Hemingway rewrote the ending of Farewell to Arms 39 times. That's quite an approach to writing.

I'm more of a storyteller than a wordsmith. For me, writing is a very visual process. I close my eyes and just type out whatever I'm looking at. Rough draft usually isn't pretty, but I do like to tighten up the screws and create elegance later on.

My work winds up being very visual to read as well, which i like.

What works for me is to develop a general outline of the story--plot, cast of characters, how many chapters or scenes, one or two sentences to describe what happens in each chapter--and then get started and see how far I can go. Sometimes I'm able to go all the way through to the end, especially if it's a short story, but most of the time I end up taking a break in the middle and working on something else, before coming back and finishing. It helps me to stay in practice if I write on a regular basis.

Laurel -- I've written a good few historically-set books and the funny thing is that sometimes 'what everyone knows to be true' about a time or a place isn't true at all.

So I wouldn't judge someone for not doing proper research unless you've done the research yourself. Writers find interesting facts about people and things and time periods that aren't generally known. Then they get hammered for not doing their research because they challenged a commonly held belief. For instance, medieval people bathed all the time. Who knew?

As for 'process', it varies from year to year or book to book. The process that worked fine in the first two years of your career may not work at all in year 5-7. As you grow as a person and as a writer, your process changes...which is a great thing. Doing something over and over again the same exact way is how one becomes dull and repetitive.

Shake yourself up from time to time. Try writing by the seat of your pants if you're usually a 'planner' or vice versa. It's good for your writing and your mind.

You will find that Kipling was right -- there are nine and ninety ways of composing tribal lays, and every one is right. So hearing of other people's methods will not be all that useful to you; you need to find your own way.

I never outline. Research is reserved for during or after, never before. I do need to 'hear' my characters; at least one of them has to have a good clear voice so that I can channel it. Often I do not 'look' at my characters for quite a long time, and their description is a surprise, but I must 'hear.'

As I write I do need to know how the work ends, but I have discovered that anything will do. I can use the same ending for every book I write. The one I use is: "...and then they all died." Simply having this as the hypothetical end of the book is enough. I can write an entire novel, driving the plot towards the messy death of all the characters, and stop before I get there. (The books never actually end with the demise -- it would be depressing.)

The way that each writer goes through the creative process is one of the most interesting aspects of talking to other writers. I just finished a series of essays on my own writing process (conceptualizing, framing and plot development) that some of you might find interesting. If you do decide to read it, please let me know what you think.

http://gamalhennessy.com/

Have fun.
Gamal