You’ve Got Questions – Plotters, Pantsers, and You

In the “You’ve Got Questions” post, Monique Liddle had this great question:

Stephen King rarely plots when he writes. He likes to create a “What if?” situation. Then, lets his characters travel that terrain and converse with each other as they move through the situation, along with the action. Of course, when he edits, themes emerge & he goes back and develops those themes in his writing. (He outlined his writing techniques mainly in “On Writing.”)

Other writers develop their plot, outline their story idea and develop back-stories of their characters to help the writer develop a response for the character. (There’s more to these, but this is the gist.)

What do you see as the pros and cons for each way of plotting for a story? And which do you prefer?

I’ve read a ton of posts about plotting versus pantsing. Some posts are very much in one camp over the other, some claim to be balanced (“do what works for you”) yet still show a bias towards one over the other, and a small handful truly are all for whichever method you prefer.

Let’s get this out of the way up front. I firmly believe which method is the best is going to depend on the individual. Different personalities* prefer different methods. It is up to each individual to figure out which method suits them

I’ve read work from writers who used the plotting method who ended up with a very tight but formulaic story. I’ve read work from pantsers that is, for lack of a better description, a hot mess. And I’ve read work from both camps that is brilliant.

So, if someone tells you one method is better than the other, or they say they’re equal but in the same breath bash one method, RUN. The bad advice cup runneth over.

Now, I am personally very comfortable in one camp, so a pro/con list wouldn’t be terribly accurate, so I will instead provide some observations on the two methods. [Readers: chime in on this point, since I know you all are varied in your methods, and will be able to provide valuable information on the method you choose to use.]

Plottskis (aka Plotters)

Probably the biggest pro of plotting is consistency. Since plotters have invested time (not to mention charts, graphs, story boards, post its, and other colorful office supplies) in outlining the story ahead of time, they are likely to catch, or avoid altogether, inconsistencies in the story.

This can apply to the characters as well. Their personalities have likely been clearly laid out, their role in the story defined, avoiding any instances where they might do something “out of character”.

This also tends to mean the editing process is smoother.

It could be argued that plottskis save time in the writing process because of their planning, but keep in mind that the more thorough the planning, the more time spent on the story at the beginning of the process.

Pantskis (aka Pantsers)

Pantskis let the story happen. This is not to say there is zero planning, just that their planning is more likely to involve daydreaming a scene rather than creating a flowchart.

Pantskis are often character driven. They don’t always know who the “good guys” and “bad guys” are in the story. They may start with an idea, but they tend to get caught up in the creative “flow” of writing, sometimes resulting in twists and turns they didn’t foresee.

For these reasons, one of the bigger criticisms of pantskis is the amount of editing they have to do at the end of writing their story. They have to weed out inconsistencies, sometimes entire scenes or characters that no longer make sense with the direction the story “decided” to take.

What am I?

I would likely be designated a Pantser. What Stephen King describes in “On Writing” is very much how I write. I sit down at the keyboard (or notebook – yes, I write both ways) and just go.

I tried the outlining method once, because I do believe that it is important for writers to find which method produces a better story, not just rely on the fact that the one they gravitate towards is right for them.

While I could still write a decent story, it was a painful process. The fun in writing (at least fiction) for me is in watching the story unfold. Outlining ahead of time killed that for me.

Now, I do want to be clear that I do think that planning in your storytelling is important. I may not like the idea of being a plotter, but I still think ahead.

For example, my Tell Me a Story series is a serial fiction where the readers get to contribute ideas that control what will happen next in the story.

That means I can’t really plot, even if I wanted to. Yet, I do have a plan. That plan is just very fluid. While I don’t have a story board full of index cards and colorful pretties**, I do have varying scenes bouncing around in my head. If I close my eyes, there is a clear image of who each character is, just not necessarily what they will do.

But, if my characters personalities weren’t clear in my mind, if a general landscape of the story didn’t exist, it would probably be a bit more difficult to write my story. So, in that way, there is planning involved.

I think what’s important for every writer is that they are honest with themselves about what kind of writer they are – and that they don’t necessarily need to define that.

Don’t be a pantser just because it sounds like less work. Don’t be a plotter because a book/blogger/teacher told you that it is the better way (don’t do anything just because a book/blogger/teacher told you it was the better way, for that matter). Take the time to figure out what methods make you better at what you do.

You may be firmly in one camp, or you may be a mix of the two. Your style may vary depending on what genre you are working with as well.

Don’t get caught up on defining what kind of writer you are. Just find what makes you write well (again, this requires being honest with yourself, which could be a whole other post entirely) and write.

Because really, that’s what it always comes down to, right?

Just write.

*for the record, I am an INFP…I’d be interested to see if there is any correlation between personality types and writing methods
**can you tell that this is the aspect of plotting I am most jealous of? seriously, the magical trips to the office supply store stocking up on poster board, colorful pens, post its…sigh 

Why It’s Worth a Watch Wednesday – Bunheads!

This week Tiffany White and I take on two new television programs on Why It’s Worth a Watch Wednesday in our first Boys versus Girls post—ABC Family’s Bunheads and TBS’s Men at Work.

I’ve never in my life been the little girl with dreams of being a ballerina. I enjoy the idea of dancing, but my interest in it never developed very far beyond that. Maybe it has something to do with my solid lack of coordination, or fear of leotards. (Not to be confused with leopards, which are awesome.)

Anyhoo, despite my disinterest in the craft, I was pretty excited about the new series Bunheads, which derives its name from the common hairstyle worn by ballet dancers.

Why so excited?

I love dialogue. Banter, “speechifying”, you name it, when done well, I love it. If I could write only dialogue all day, I probably would. There are a few writers that are known for their abilities in the dialogue department (Sorkin, anyone?). One such writer is Amy Sherman Palladino. If you just said, “who?”, go to your room.

But seriously, Amy is the creator of The Gilmore Girls. If you watched GG (yes, in my head, this show is what GG stands for, not Gossip Girl) and hated it, you should probably just move along now. Bunheads will not be for you.

For the rest of you, Bunheads follows the character Michelle (Sutton Foster), a classically trained dancer turned Vegas showgirl who is feeling a bit sorry about her lot in life. As a result she agrees to marry her very persistent suitor, a sweet man who she doesn’t love but wins her over with tales of his hometown, Paradise.

Michelle arrives in Paradise to find a town that doesn’t exactly warm up to her, particularly her mother-in-law Fanny (Kelly Bishop). The only people in town that seem pleased with her arrival are four ballet students, excited about the prospect of knowing a “real” dancer.

As if being in this small town isn’t bad enough, a tragedy hits, leaving Michelle even more alone than she already was.

I’m really enjoying the show so far. I should disclose that I was a fan of The Gilmore Girls, and was a little worried this show would try too hard to be what Gilmore was. So far, it seem to be striking the right balance of being its own show, but retaining the signatures of Mrs. Sherman Palladino. The fast paced chatter, the pop culture references (although those seem to be toned down  a bit), the three generations to relate to; it’s all there.

There is also something to be said for a new program that appeals to various ages. Family programming is hard to come by, but like Gilmore Girls, this show seems like it will be one that will be enjoyed by adults and young people alike. (Oh, and dudes, I know far too many of you who pretend not to like The Gilmore Girls, yet will sit through it, laugh, and want to see the next episode, so don’t get all “this is a girl show” on me.)

Bunheads is definitely off to a solid start. I give it a MacTV rating. Totally a pantry staple.

[Hey, non-cable peeps: You can watch the third episode on Hulu. The rights have not been secured yet to keep a queue of the shows, so fingers crossed they get them soon so you can catch up. In the meantime, you can get away with starting at ep 3.]

What do you think? Have you watched Bunheads? How would you rate it? Are you a fan of dancing or The Gilmore Girls?
Now click over to Tiffany’s blog and see what she thinks about the Men at Work.
Come back next week when we review something…this Tropical Storm has my brain a bit waterlogged and is taking a toll on my ability to plan.

Remember to stop by the #watchwed hashtag in Twitter to discuss any of today’s reviews, or to mention any television programs that you’d like to see on Why It’s Worth a Watch Wednesday in the future.
ATTENTION RED CARPET WINNERS! Your photos will be posted in next week’s post. Sorry. Tropical Storm Debby ate my homework.
A Recap of The WatchWed Review System:
GTV (Gourmet TV): Everything we want and more
MacTV (MacNCheese TV): Guilty pleasure. Not perfect, but is satisfies
GMacTV (Gourmet MacNCheese TV): A combination of fine wine and comfort food
JFTV (Junk food TV): It’s not great for us, but we’ll go back for seconds
TBPTV (Twice Baked Potato TV): Part gourmet and delicious, while absolutely horrible for our cholesterol
SSTV (Still Simmering TV): It has potential, but the jury is still out
NIV (Nyquil Induced Viewing): Perfect for that late night television sleep timer
LOTV (Liver&Onions TV): Do we really have to explain? Blech

Tell Me a Story – Part XIV

Last week, you had to come up with a difficult situation for Kate. Again, you guys were all over place and I think I may have been as entertained with your comments as with the actual story. I went with Tiffany White’s suggestion. Actually, I sorta went with both of her suggestions:

A tough situation, huh? How about Anton looks into George and he’s hesitant to tell her what he finds. When they do finally meet up, both Anton and Kate feel like they are being watched?

OR

Someone catches wind of Red’s meeting group and walks in and trashes the apartment when neither girl is home. 

~~~~~

“So, he was up to something shady then?”

I paused on the sidewalk, digging to the bottom of my bag for the apartment key, pinning the phone between my ear and shoulder.

“No. I said there were suspicious deposits and withdrawals.”

I loved Anton, but sometimes I thought talking to him should be considered a competitive sport.

“Riiight. Which would mean he was up to something.”

“Normally.”

I sighed.

“But something isn’t normal.”

“Yes. The records. They do not not make sense.”

“How so?”

“I did some digging. They all originate on same day.”

“So he made the deposits and withdrawls on the same day.”

“No. Is not what I said. The dates are different. But the records did not come from those dates.”

I took a moment as I unlocked the door to the building to digest what Anton was saying.

“You’re saying that the records are fake?”

“I do not know for sure.”

“Did you find the source?”

I could hear Anton grumble. Puzzles he couldn’t solve were rare. And upsetting. “Not yet, kotik.”

“That’s so weird,” I said, entering the apartment. “What would anyone have to gain by…”

“By? Kate?”

I stood in silence, staring at the disaster area that was the apartment. Couch cushions ripped, drawers dumped, tables overturned, and Red nowhere to be found. “Oh my…”

“What is wrong? What is happening?”

“Anton, someone trashed the apartment.”

“What? I am coming over.”

Before I could answer, Anton was already gone. I scanned the room. Among the mess, I noticed Red’s laptop was missing. I hoped that meant she found a reason to leave the apartment with it, but the sick feeling in my stomach believed otherwise.

I rushed up the stairs to see what the damage was in my room. When I reached the top of the stairs, I was shocked to find it in relative order. Nothing made sense.

I jumped as my phone played Minuet in D and answered it.

“Hey, Eli.”

“You okay? You don’t sound good.”

“I’m okay. But my apartment is trashed.”

“Red’s friends throw a crazy midday party?” Eli laughed at his joke, but I stayed quiet. “Okay…what’s wrong?”

“Red’s gone. Someone was here, looking for something, maybe? I don’t know. I have no idea what is going on.”

“Okay. Calm down. I’m on my way.”

Again, before I could protest, the line was silent.

~~~~~

I have a feeling some of you were hoping to get Eli and Anton in the same room, so, ta-da!

Now, how will they react to each other’s presence? Leave your ideas in the comments below.

If you stumbled upon this installment and need to catch up on the story, head over here!

Why It’s Worth a Watch Wednesday – Leap Year!

Welcome to this week’s Why It’s Worth a Watch Wednesday Tiffany and I are back from celebrating #watchwed’s one year anniversary and are rarin’ to go. (If you missed the celebration, we took photos. Go check them out.) This week Tiffany takes on the premiere of Dallas, and I hit the interwebs for entertainment, coming up with Leap Year.

Regular readers of this series know that I just recently killed my cable. That’s right. The girl who tells you what’s worth watching on television doesn’t have one.

Well, that’s not entirely true. With services like Netflix and Hulu+, I get a wide variety of my favorite programs. But, I don’t get everything I once did. So, as a service to the many of you who are in the same cable-less boat, I’ll be scouring the web series of the world for the best in online entertainment. (I’ve already begun with a previous review of Battleground.)

Leap Year caught my eye some time ago. I can’t recall exactly, but I’m sure it had something to do with Craig Bierko’s involvement in the project. I tuned in for the first episode and that was that.

The series follows 5 friends: Jack (Drew Lanning), Aaron (Yuri Baranovsky), Bryn (Alexis Boozer), Derek (Wilson Cleveland), and Olivia (Daniela DiIorio). Each character is trying to start a new business after being laid off, or “released” from their old job, in an effort to win half a million in funding for their startup.

I adore this show for the simple fact that it is good. Not only believable, but likable characters engaged in witty, realistic dialogue, in a plot that is interesting and current…there aren’t many TV shows to which I can attribute a similar description.

The part that I find particularly interesting is that this is “branded television”, yet the brand (Hiscox, provider of small business insurance) is not visible in the actual show. The show manages to successfully chronicle the various ups and downs of a small business, particularly a startup, which not only resonates with the brand’s key demographic, but entertains anyone who watches. For businesses venturing into branded entertainment, Leap Year certainly sets the standard.

Oh, and did I mention the guests? Season one boasted Mashable’s Adam Ostrow and entrepeneurs like Guy Kawasaki and Gary Vaynerchuk, as well as the hilarious Craig Bierko and Julie Warner. This season has stars like Elisha Dushku, Emma Caulfied, Steven Weber, and my favorites, Craig Bierko (he’s worth mentioning again, right?) and Joshua Malina.

That list shouldn’t detract from the regular cast, whose talents make this show work.

Yeah, so, my point is, I like the show. A lot. GMacTV, people. The episodes aren’t lengthy, so it’s more of a gourmet snack than a meal, but it is totally worth sitting down for.

Are any of you watching Leap Year? Have you jumped into more original web programming yet? Do you have any favorites? Which ones would you like featured on Why It’s Worth a Watch?

Now, head over to Tiffany’s and see her thoughts on the much discussed Dallas.

Come back next week when we review something…  it’s summer time and the heat is taking a toll on our planning ahead.

Remember to stop by the #watchwed hashtag on Twitter to discuss any of today’s reviews, or to mention any television programs that you’d like to see on Why It’s Worth a Watch Wednesday in the future.

Last week, we offered a special anniversary giveaway where I promised one lucky commenter from my blog and another from Tiffany’s a red carpet event photo with the celebrity of their choice.  First, THANK YOU to everyone who participated!  But sadly we can only have one winner. Or, technically, two.

After using the random number generator at www.random.org, lucky #11 won here!

Who is #11?

::shuffles papers::

Angela Ackerman! Angela, I’ll be contacting you for a photo to use for your red carpet experience. We’ll post the photos next week.

[Edited to add: You can check out Leap Year on Hulu or here. Enjoy!]

A Recap of The WatchWed Review System:

GTV (Gourmet TV): Everything we want and more
GMacTV (Gourmet MacNCheese TV): A combination of fine wine and comfort food MacTV (MacNCheese TV): Guilty pleasure. Not perfect, but is satisfies
JFTV (Junk food TV): It’s not great for us, but we’ll go back for seconds
TBPTV (Twice Baked Potato TV): Part gourmet and delicious, while absolutely horrible for our cholesterol
SSTV (Still Simmering TV): It has potential, but the jury is still out
NIV (Nyquil Induced Viewing): Perfect for that late night television sleep timer
LOTV (Liver&Onions TV): Do we really have to explain? Blech