# Planning vs Pantsing



## T.S.Bowman

qwertyportne said:


> _Plot is no more than footprints left in the snow after your characters have run by on their way to incredible destinations. Plot is observed after the fact rather than before. It cannot precede action. It is the chart that remains when an action is through. That is all Plot ever should be. It is human desire let run, running, and reaching a goal. It cannot be mechanical. It can only be dynamic. So, stand aside, forget targets, let the characters, your fingers, body, blood, and heart do._ ~ Ray Bradbury



As much as I love Bradbury and would agree with everything he said, that style is not conducive to creation for every writer. Some people _need_ the structure found in writing outlines and plotting every move the characters are going to make ahead of sitting down to begin writing. 

I do love the idea of Bradbury being a Pantser, though. :-D


----------



## Ixarku

qwertyportne said:


> Which brings me to another point about rules: When I began writing stories, I followed the rule to outline my stories. That rule told me to decide where my story will end, choose a starting point and write toward that ending. I needed that rule when I first began writing fiction, but I gradually discovered my characters are in control of where the story is going, not me. I'm just the pencil.
> 
> _Plot is no more than footprints left in the snow after your characters have run by on their way to incredible destinations. Plot is observed after the fact rather than before. It cannot precede action. It is the chart that remains when an action is through. That is all Plot ever should be. It is human desire let run, running, and reaching a goal. It cannot be mechanical. It can only be dynamic. So, stand aside, forget targets, let the characters, your fingers, body, blood, and heart do._ ~ Ray Bradbury




I think Bradbury is flat out wrong.  And the reason is what I see as a fundamental misunderstanding on the part of the "pantsers" about what outlining entails.  Plotting and outlining doesn't mean you force your characters down some arbitrary path just because that path happens to fit your view of where the story should go.  It doesn't mean that you have to start with a predetermined ending and channel everything in the story towards that singularity.

Rather, the key aspect of outlining is that you ask the question _now_, "What would my characters do in this situation?" rather than waiting until you're knee-deep into the manuscript.  Then you put it down on paper in a short, summarized version and use it as a guide later.  Outlining helps you find and answer the tough questions earlier, rather than when you're tearing your hair out later because you're stuck in the middle of a scene.  As you go, if you find the guide doesn't work, then you change it or abandon it altogether.  And you can do this at any point during the outlining stage or during the actual writing of the story.  The point is not to restrict the writer's creativity but to keep the writer focused.  Outlining doesn't mean that the characters have any less control over their actions than if you improvise the story as you go.  Outlining is simply a tool to help you look ahead and plan.


----------



## shadowwalker

Bradbury isn't "flat out wrong" because he was merely expressing his _opinion_. But that's my problem with people adhering to writing "rules" - all any of them are, are various writer's _opinions_. As to the outlining, I find very few writers don't realize that outlines aren't written in stone; instead, many don't like them because it feels like the story is already told when the outline is finished. Then it's like the commute to work instead of Lewis and Clark. But that's why some writers use outlines and some don't.


(Should that be "various writer's opinions" or "various writers' opinions"? It's too early...)


----------



## Ixarku

shadowwalker said:


> Bradbury isn't "flat out wrong" because he was merely expressing his _opinion_. But that's my problem with people adhering to writing "rules" - all any of them are, are various writer's _opinions_. As to the outlining, I find very few writers don't realize that outlines aren't written in stone; instead, many don't like them because it feels like the story is already told when the outline is finished. Then it's like the commute to work instead of Lewis and Clark. But that's why some writers use outlines and some don't.




Well, if it makes you feel better if I rephrase it, it's my _opinion_ that he's flat out wrong.  Frankly, it amazes me that so many writers don't realize that outlines aren't written in stone.  Nothing else about a manuscript is written in stone, why would an outline be any different?  People rewrite stories over and over, why not outlines?

The objections to outlining I can relate to are a) outlining can eliminate the writer's internal need to write the story, and b) revealing the details about the story too early can reduce the joy of discovery.  In my case, I have a much greater need for progress to be measurable and achievable, and working from an outline gives me both.

I think everybody understands that "rules are meant to be broken."  And that they're not really rules anyway.  These ideas are personal constructs arising from past experience, nothing more, nothing less.  One person's rule might be genius to somebody else, or insanity to another.


----------



## shadowwalker

Ixarku said:


> Well, if it makes you feel better if I rephrase it, it's my _opinion_ that he's flat out wrong.



I couldn't care less how you phrase it - just pointing out that opinions cannot be, by definition, "wrong".


----------



## Ixarku

shadowwalker said:


> I couldn't care less how you phrase it - just pointing out that opinions cannot be, by definition, "wrong".




I totally would have remained unaware of that if you hadn't pointed it out.  Do I also need to point out that, by the same logic, my opinion can't be wrong either?  :deadhorse:


----------



## W.Goepner

Ixarku said:


> Rather, the key aspect of outlining is that you ask the question _now_, "What would my characters do in this situation?" rather than waiting until you're knee-deep into the manuscript.  Then you put it down on paper in a short, summarized version and use it as a guide later.  Outlining helps you find and answer the tough questions earlier, rather than when you're tearing your hair out later because you're stuck in the middle of a scene.  As you go, if you find the guide doesn't work, then you change it or abandon it altogether.  And you can do this at any point during the outlining stage or during the actual writing of the story.  The point is not to restrict the writer's creativity but to keep the writer focused.  Outlining doesn't mean that the characters have any less control over their actions than if you improvise the story as you go.  Outlining is simply a tool to help you look ahead and plan.



All right now I read this part. 

Stumble, spit, sputter sputter. 

Wow, I am back in High School, going over the same discussion with my English teacher. If I know the outcome of my story so well that I can setup such a defined outline, to know the stumbling blocks or pitfalls my characters will be facing,"Why do I need a outline to determine it??" I still have that issue. I cannot tell you what, how, or any of that until I come across it. As I told my teacher, "That is like telling you what the other kids are going to or not do as we leave this class room, and what I am going to do when we do."

As I Hike the American river canyons around my home town. I can only imagine "IF" I encounter a Bear or snake or cougar, What I might do. And then the reality of it is a different story. I have never encountered any of these Yet, with the exception of the King snake that is nonvenomous. I always try to get close to them and catch them if only to hold them a moment then let them go. 

My problem is the Chaos Theory, Too many undetermined factors to try and plot out for me to draw up an outline. I still cannot wrap my brain arround it enough for it to help me.


----------



## Kyle R

W.Goepner said:


> To work a predetermined plot is restrictive is what Bradbury was saying IMO.



Plotting ahead of time may have felt restrictive to Bradbury (who is one of my favorite authors of all time, by the way. What a master of prose!), but it can be freeing to others. 

Science has made great leaps and bounds in explaining the different types of mental processes, and how certain individuals prefer approaching things in one way versus another. Suffice to say: Bradbury was predominantly a *divergent thinker*. Others (the plotters, like myself and Ixarku) are generally *convergent thinkers*.

Neither approach is wrong, but a divergent thinker will likely find plotting restrictive and artificial, while a convergent thinker will likely find pants-ing aimless and unproductive.

And then you'll have the individuals who are partly in both categories and approach things with a fluidity that resembles ambidexterity, pants-ing and plotting simultaneously to varying degrees.

What works for one can be kryptonite to another. The main thing to keep in mind is that we're all our own superheroes. :encouragement:


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Ixarku said:


> I think Bradbury is flat out wrong.



That's fine. You can think that if it suits you.



> Rather, the key aspect of outlining is that you ask the question _now_, "What would my characters do in this situation?" rather than waiting until you're knee-deep into the manuscript.  Then you put it down on paper in a short, summarized version and use it as a guide later.  Outlining helps you find and answer the tough questions earlier, rather than when you're tearing your hair out later because you're stuck in the middle of a scene.  As you go, if you find the guide doesn't work, then you change it or abandon it altogether.  And you can do this at any point during the outlining stage or during the actual writing of the story.  The point is not to restrict the writer's creativity but to keep the writer focused.  Outlining doesn't mean that the characters have any less control over their actions than if you improvise the story as you go.  Outlining is simply a tool to help you look ahead and plan.



Planning does nothing for me.

My characters have shredded any plan I had for them multiple times so far. That's what being a Pantser is. 

The way I see it, if I sit down and take the time to write out an outline and ask myself "What would my character do if...", only to have the character do something completely different, then the time I spent writing that "guide" was time wasted. That wasted time would have been much more effectively used in actually writing the story itself. 

Besides, I don't have any hair to pull out. So I'm not too concerned with that aspect of things. LOL


----------



## shadowwalker

T.S.Bowman said:


> The way I see it, if I sit down and take the time to write out an outline and ask myself "What would my character do if...", only to have the character do something completely different, then the time I spent writing that "guide" was time wasted. That wasted time would have been much more effectively used in actually writing the story itself.



Exactly.


----------



## Kyle R

T.S.Bowman said:
			
		

> The way I see it, if I sit down and take the time to write out an outline and ask myself "What would my character do if...", only to have the character do something completely different, then the time I spent writing that "guide" was time wasted. That wasted time would have been much more effectively used in actually writing the story itself.



I do believe there's a learning curve that comes with outlining. A lot of my early outlines were rigid, clumsy, or just plain bad. I'd find myself deviating from them because the story, as planned, began to make less sense the further I wrote into it. 

But that wasn't a fault of the process of outlining—that was a result of my inexperience with outlining.

I deviated from my outlines because my outlining abilities were poor.

The better and more experienced I got with outlining, the less I found myself deviating from them. Now I'm in the final stages of a novel that I plotted from opening scene to final scene, with everything written as planned.

Like most things, outlining is a skill that can be learned and honed. Sometimes I feel that pants-ers may be missing out on the benefits of it because they simply haven't taken the time to learn and practice their outlining skills.

But, I can understand how some may not wish to learn it. Why should they, if pants-ing works for them?

In the end, as much as I believe in the benefits of outlining, I also believe that what works for the individual should trump everything. If pants-ing works for you, then by all means, pants away! Some of the most successful authors in the world swear by it, so it definitely has its merits.

I just want to point out that I, too, was in the "I can't help deviating from my outlines!" place at one point, but that went away the more experienced I got with the process. :encouragement:


----------



## shadowwalker

KyleColorado said:


> The better and more experienced I got with outlining, the less I found myself deviating from them. Now I'm in the final stages of a novel that I plotted from opening scene to final scene, with everything written as planned.



But there's still the question of "If I'm going to spend all this time on the outline, why not spend it just writing the story itself?". And that's the place a lot of "pantsers" are coming from. That, and when the outline is done, we're faced with what I consider just a massive rewrite (from outline to full story).



KyleColorado said:


> Like most things, outlining is a skill that can be learned and honed. Sometimes I feel that pants-ers may be missing out on the benefits of it because they simply haven't taken the time to learn and practice their outlining skills.



I learned and practiced outlining in school. Years of it. And I was very good at it. For nonfiction, I would definitely find it useful. For fiction - it's done nothing but bog me down and made the actual writing of the story a chore. So no, it's not a matter of we just aren't doing it right - it's a matter of it just doesn't work for us.


----------



## Bishop

shadowwalker said:


> But there's still the question of "If I'm going to spend all this time on the outline, why not spend it just writing the story itself?". And that's the place a lot of "pantsers" are coming from. That, and when the outline is done, we're faced with what I consider just a massive rewrite (from outline to full story).



My issue in this ballpark is the rewrite part. I have a hard time motivating myself to writing more when I already know how things turn out for the characters. I'm a daydreamer, and that's where I find my stories exist. If I write an outline, the daydreaming then gets in the way of the writing because I'm letting my mind play it back in my head over and over again. If I leave the story open ended, I can't sate my brain's lust without writing it to fruition. My daydreaming demands an ending to the stories that exist there. If I give it one, the drive fades into the realm of procrastination. "Oh, I already know what I'm going to do with that, no need to worry about it now..."

And then, I lose.


----------



## Kyle R

shadowwalker said:
			
		

> _But there's still the question of "If I'm going to spend all this time on the outline, why not spend it just writing the story itself?". And that's the place a lot of "pantsers" are coming from._


I think that question can be answered from a specific perspective. From the plotters perspective, a question would be, "Why spend all this time writing a story if there's a chance of it being poorly-constructed and/or poorly-conceived?" With the length of time some works can take (months, even years in some cases), it makes sense (to me) to make sure I'm going to be investing my time in a viable end-product.

The same way a construction company wants to see blueprints and know material and labor costs before investing in a project, I want to know what I'm getting into and what the details will be before I dive into it.

Without an outline, there's a possibility I may waste a huge amount of time on a big, jumbled nothing.

Others, like yourself, may very well be skilled at crafting a solid story as they move along. This is the beauty of pants-ing, in my opinion, the way a solid piece of work can grow, organically, as the writer progresses.

I don't have that ability, though. Without a blueprint, my stories tend to be poor. Hence my need for outlining. _With_ a blueprint, my stories tend to be well-rounded and well-crafted. Hence my pride in outlining. 



			
				shadowwalker said:
			
		

> _I learned and practiced outlining in school. Years of it. And I was very good at it. For nonfiction, I would definitely find it useful. For fiction - it's done nothing but bog me down and made the actual writing of the story a chore. So no, it's not a matter of we just aren't doing it right - it's a matter of it just doesn't work for us._


Right. Whatever works and feels most comfortable for the individual. I completely agree.

I have no intention of pushing outlining on others. I'm simply pointing out that, from my own experience, outlining is a skill that can be learned and refined, if one wishes to pursue it. :encouragement:


----------



## W.Goepner

shadowwalker said:


> But there's still the question of "If I'm going to spend all this time on the outline, why not spend it just writing the story itself?". And that's the place a lot of "pantsers" are coming from. That, and when the outline is done, we're faced with what I consider just a massive rewrite (from outline to full story).



I guess that makes me a "pantser" also. I feel if I know enough to outline then I do not need one. Then there is the fact I hav a 243thousand word, and more, story. Because I did not have a guide to keep me bound. Or am I mistaking and it would have gone on anyway?



> I learned and practiced outlining in school. Years of it. And I was very good at it. For nonfiction, I would definitely find it useful. For fiction - it's done nothing but bog me down and made the actual writing of the story a chore. So no, it's not a matter of we just aren't doing it right - it's a matter of it just doesn't work for us.



My teachers tried to get me to outline book-reports and my short stories I attempted. "Your error was in not outlining." They would say. Aaaargh I could never get them to understand me. I doubt I will ever figure it out.


----------



## Sam

KyleColorado said:


> I think that question can be answered from a specific perspective. From the plotters perspective, a question would be, "Why spend all this time writing a story if there's a chance of it being poorly-constructed and/or poorly-conceived?" With the length of time some works can take (months, even years in some cases), it makes sense (to me) to make sure I'm going to be investing my time in a viable end-product.



Once more the notion that non-outlined novels are often poorly constructed (no hyphen required, by the way, as the preceding word is an adverb) and poorly conceived rears its ugly head. You do not become a bad writer because you refrain from outlining something. To infer that I (and other pantsers) am not investing my time in a viable end product because I don't plan is a rather ignorant statement that makes me realise just how much cluelessness abounds on the topic of pantsing.


----------



## W.Goepner

Bishop said:


> My issue in this ballpark is the rewrite part. I have a hard time motivating myself to writing more when I already know how things turn out for the characters. I'm a daydreamer, and that's where I find my stories exist. If I write an outline, the daydreaming then gets in the way of the writing because I'm letting my mind play it back in my head over and over again. If I leave the story open ended, I can't sate my brain's lust without writing it to fruition. My daydreaming demands an ending to the stories that exist there. If I give it one, the drive fades into the realm of procrastination. "Oh, I already know what I'm going to do with that, no need to worry about it now..."
> 
> And then, I lose.



See? There it is. I write as I run, (so to speak) Watching the trail as it meanders and winds itself about. My mind follows the trail of the story and I write it. If it goes left I cannot follow the trail right over the cliff-edge. If I knew the trail went left to begin with then why bother with following just explore. I do get the whole outline aspect. Try finding the major points of what you are thinking. 

Hmm. Let me try it with the next story I have been trying to work on. In "The Searcher" it is learned that Bagla went to outher worlds to find ideas for creation. One world he went to was near destruction. Before he was able to retrieve his children that he lost there it broke apart. He convinced some of the inhabitants to follow him to his home world before it did, amongst them was the creator of that world. The MC James noticed in the cave that housed the portholes, life on one of the chunks. His Job as the searcher is to find these missing children, The chunks have other survivors on them also, and they pose a challenge for James and the creator of that world. 

Now to outline all that and fit it into a viable story. With the creator repairing the world and James bringing Bagla his children, in the end.

There I have the beginning and the end. How to fill in the rest? If I could figure out the main points to follow in between It would be great. I can almost hear my teacher saying, "What do you want them to do? How do you want them to do it? What are the challenges the other survivors pose?" Hmm, I... They... He... Well... I don't know for sure but yes I see the points. Just how to...


----------



## W.Goepner

Sam said:


> Once more the notion that non-outlined novels are often poorly constructed (no hyphen required, by the way, as the preceding word is an adverb) and poorly conceived rears its ugly head. You do not become a bad writer because you refrain from outlining something. To infer that I (and other pantsers) am not investing my time in a viable end product because I don't plan is a rather ignorant statement that makes me realise just how much cluelessness abounds on the topic of pantsing.



All right I am clueless, I did not even know the term or that it existed, OR that I was in that category. I can see where an outline might help me keep some structure, but I believe I did well without it. 

I think my point is, If I can wrap my mind arround the story well enough to outline it, Then the outline is not necessary because I already have the story and should just write it.

Oh damn I did it didn't I? 

"Just Write" 

LOL 

Thanks Sam.


----------



## Kyle R

Sam said:


> Once more the notion that non-outlined novels are often poorly constructed (no hyphen required, by the way, as the preceding word is an adverb) and poorly conceived rears its ugly head. You do not become a bad writer because you refrain from outlining something. To infer that I (and other pantsers) am not investing my time in a viable end product because I don't plan is a rather ignorant statement that makes me realise just how much cluelessness abounds on the topic of pantsing.



No need to get defensive, Sam.  I didn't imply anything happening "often" in my statement. The comments were to highlight my own reasonings for why I would spend time outlining, as shadow's question asked.

I don't mean that other writers risk creating poor stories from not onlining. But I *do* mean that *I* risk creating poor stories by not outlining. Actually, with me, the risk is so high it becomes a likelihood.

My statements were about my own inabilities, not about the inabilities of others.



			
				Sam said:
			
		

> _ You do not become a bad writer because you refrain from outlining something._


I certainly do (or believe I do), which was the point of my post.


----------



## W.Goepner

At KyleColorado,

As I stated my teachers were the outline type. I think a outline of sorts will help me but to figure out the defining points are not an easy thing for me. How do I get these if I do not know them yet? That is the same thing I asked my teachers.

As I stated a few post back.

Let me try it with the next story I have been trying to work on.

BACKGROUND; In "The  Searcher" it is learned that Bagla went to other worlds to find ideas  for creation. One world he went to was near destruction. Before he was  able to retrieve his children, that he lost there, it broke apart. Before  it did he  convinced some of the inhabitants to follow him to his home world, amongst them was the creator of that world. The MC James  noticed in the cave that housed the portholes, life on one of the  chunks. 

New story; The Broken Planet

James' job as the searcher is to find these missing children. The  chunks have other survivors on them also, and they pose a challenge for  James and the creator of that world. 

Now to outline all that and fit it into a viable story. With the creator  repairing the world and James bringing Bagla his children, in the end.

There I have the beginning and the end. How to fill in the rest? If I  could figure out the main points to follow in between, it would be great.  I don't know for sure but yes I  see the points. Just how to do it eludes me. 						

I will try to place the ides for the story I have for now. I know this is some form of outline but I understand it should be more.

I have a brief description of the events that led to the planets destruction. In this description we learn that the creator put too much of them selves into their creations and became lost amongst them. Only to discover that they returned to them self as the creations die. Sort of, there are great loopholes within.

A paragraph that lets the reader know there are others on the chunks besides Bagla's children. One of these others believe they are the true creator. Not the one that Bagla rescued. Thus the difficulties fore mentioned.

From there I pick up the story near the end of the first. Prepping James and the others that will accompany him on this quest.

Then to end it with the creator of that world, repairing it and the relations with his creations. Also with the return of the ones lost there.

There is a big gap to fill in between.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

My teachers were also the "outline type". 

Unfortunately, back when I was in school, the system didn't give a damn whether or not something actually worked for the students they were teaching. Those who could work by doing an outline passed. Those who couldn't, like me, failed.

I still don't work from an outline.


----------



## Gyarachu

T.S.Bowman said:


> Unfortunately, back when I was in school, the system didn't give a damn whether or not something actually worked for the students they were teaching. Those who could work by doing an outline passed. Those who couldn't, like me, failed.



Sadly, I think this is still true. At least is was a few years ago when I was in high school.


----------



## Greimour

Seems people are forgetting that the linked posts are (in majority) jokes... at least they seem to be to me.

But the real question of the thread was what (if any) the rules are that you follow.

Debating answers is great, I have had fun reading them - but aren't you going to to also post your own rules?

You could argue against rule: (8?*): "Plotting is for losers."
By doing Rule (8*) of your own: "Stories without plots are like fish without water."

I had fun reading peoples rules on the links, even if they aren't all that serious. I would be interested in knowing any rules you guys come up with as stated in post 1.


 ^_^


----------



## Ixarku

W.Goepner said:


> All right now I read this part.
> Wow, I am back in High School, going over the same discussion with my English teacher. If I know the outcome of my story so well that I can setup such a defined outline, to know the stumbling blocks or pitfalls my characters will be facing,"Why do I need a outline to determine it??"




The point is that you _don't know _something until you sit down and figure it out.  If I knew everything about the story in the first place, I wouldn't be outlining at all.  I outline to help identify problems before they become insurmountable.  If you figure something out and write down the idea but don't formally structure what you're doing, you're just taking notes.  If you're planning out scene by how the story will flow, that's outlining.  If you wait until you're producing the actual manuscript to do this stuff, then you're writing.  There's not that much differentiation here; it's just when you do something and what degree to take it to.

There are a lot of reasons for outlining or not, as suits your predisposition.  Frankly, I can't imagine starting any kind of project that requires months or years of work and hundreds of man-hours without having some kind of plan in place; to me, that's a recipe for false starts, stress, and many wasted hours.  But I'm very left brained and I come from a profession where working against plans and meeting tight deadlines are a daily experience.  "Rework" is both a reality of my profession and a four letter word, and much of it can be avoided by proper planning.  I see it over and over again.  I'd rather spend 20 hours planning a project and spend 20 hours on a smooth execution, rather than spend no time in planning, and spend 20 to 60 hours on a bumpy execution and possibly miss a deadline to boot.  Now obviously in writing fiction in one's spare time, deadlines are more likely not to be a factor, but the other benefits of planning remain.  And most importantly of all, no plan is ever written in stone.


Outlining and plotting are, for all intents and purposes, interchangeable concepts.  In both instances at the most fundamental level, they are tools for planning a story.  It's the presumption that 'planning is a waste of time' or that 'you can't plan because you can't know what your characters will do until you get there' that I have an issue with.  These are flawed statements because there are countless exceptions that prove otherwise.

But, again, as always, do what you want, do what works for you, and don't worry about the opinions of others.


Also, bonus points to Kyle for mentioning "convergent" and "divergent" thinking.


----------



## shadowwalker

Ixarku said:


> It's the presumption that 'planning is a waste of time' or that 'you can't plan because you can't know what your characters will do until you get there' that I have an issue with.  These are flawed statements because there are countless exceptions that prove otherwise.



It really boils down to what most have been saying - what works for some yada yada. For pantsers, there is no "presumption" that planning is a waste of time - for pantsers, it _is_. Outliners have a similar "presumption" - that writing without a plan means confusion and countless rewrites - but that's an entirely different aspect of writing (the 'get it all down first then revise' versus 'edit/revise as you go' methods). 

I think new writers should try a variety of methods (and variations/combinations of methods) to see what works best for them. And I really wish that every discussion of method would have a mandatory "This is what works for _me _" and ban blanket statements about the methods one _doesn't _use. But then I wish is was always June, too...


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Ya know...I keep seeing the words "multiple rewrites" in relation to being a Pantser.

I think there is a little bit of misunderstanding, at least as far as what Pantsing actually is.

My method of writing, which is Pantsing, is this...

_     I sit down at my computer to begin a story. I have a character or two floating around in my head and a little nugget (or sometimes a large chunk) of a story in there as well. I already have a beginning in mind,, so I write that beginning. Once it's started, my character(s) then kind of take over and let me know where they want to go. Believe it or not, my characters have never "painted" me into a corner or put me in position to have a problem that is "insurmountable" as far as plot or anything else goes. Sure, there may be small issues that come up here and there, but nothing to the extreme that it can't be fixed pretty easily._ 

There seems to be a misconception about Pantsing that gives one the idea that we just sit down and write a free flowing, continuous line of whatever pops into our head. Sometimes, yes, the words come very quickly. I once wrote around 5000 words in less than 3 hours. But never, at least as far as my writing goes, are those words not cohesive. Yes, the characters do things I hadn't planned on. But they still stick with the story. Fantasy doesn't become a Murder Mystery because a character decides the story should be one. Actually, that is a rather interesting idea, but that is neither here nor there.  

This is from shadowwalker's signature...


> First drafts don't _have _to be crap. You _can _edit as you write.


That is exactly correct. It's not as if Pantsers aren't paying attention to what we are writing. We do pay attention. As much, if not more, than someone who uses an outline. We have to, to make sure that things aren't going too far off course. We just don't need an outline to keep that course. Pantsers are just like any other writer. We take great joy in seeing our characters come alive. We feel the exhilaration of having our ideas become "reality".

Writing is a very personal thing. There is no single method that works for every writer. Some need to plan. Some need to follow a certain formula. Some need to juggle ducks before they can sit down to write. What works for them, whether it's the same as what works for you or not, is what works. 

Terry Brooks is one of my favorite writers. He's also a big believer in outlining. Ray Bradbury is another of my favorites. He was a Pantser. Were Bradbury's books subpar because of him not outlining? Do you think they would have been exponentially better had he done so?


----------



## Kyle R

shadowwalker said:


> It really boils down to what most have been saying - what works for some yada yada. [...]
> 
> I think new writers should try a variety of methods (and variations/combinations of methods) to see what works best for them. And I really wish that every discussion of method would have a mandatory "This is what works for _me _" and ban blanket statements about the methods one _doesn't _use. But then I wish is was always June, too...



Great post, Shadow. I agree.



			
				shadowwalker said:
			
		

> For pantsers, there is no "presumption" that planning is a waste of time - for pantsers, it _is_. Outliners have a similar "presumption" - that writing without a plan means confusion and countless rewrites - but that's an entirely different aspect of writing (the 'get it all down first then revise' versus 'edit/revise as you go' methods).



Though I have to disagree with this statement of yours about pantsers and plotters. I'd tweak it (were I to write it) slightly, because as it stands you've stated that pantsers make no presumptions, while plotters do.

My perspective, giving equal weight and validity to both sides:

For some pantsers, there is no presumption that plotting, for them, is a waste of time—from their own personal experience, it _is_. For some plotters, there is no presumption that pantsing, for them, is a waste of time—from their own personal experience, it _is_.

Both statements are true because both statements are subjective. :encouragement:


----------



## W.Goepner

Good point every one,

Let me ask this as I did in my tread "HELP! how do you structure an outline?" located here.



Writing Forum
Writing Related Topics
Writing Discussion
 HELP! how do you structure an outline?

How do you know the issues, or figure them out enough to outline them? Like I said I know the beginning and the end. how to fill in the blank middle is quite often lost to me until I get writing and run the characters on to their destination. I would love some insight to the middle to foresee or even create circumstances for them. it falls back to the if I could see these things I would be writing them. YET as I think about it I can see bits of what one pitfall or obstacle or even triumph might be. So those are the topics for the outline then??

Here is another topic of concern for me. Confrontation. How to create it. I guess my problem is, I have great difficulty seeing the bad guy's point of view. any ideas as to how to figure it out?


----------



## Kyle R

Probably better to start a separate thread on that topic, W. :encouragement:


----------



## W.Goepner

Greimour said:


> Seems people are forgetting that the linked posts are (in majority) jokes... at least they seem to be to me.
> 
> But the real question of the thread was what (if any) the rules are that you follow.
> 
> Debating answers is great, I have had fun reading them - but aren't you going to to also post your own rules?
> 
> You could argue against rule: (8?*): "Plotting is for losers."
> By doing Rule (8*) of your own: "Stories without plots are like fish without water."
> 
> I had fun reading peoples rules on the links, even if they aren't all that serious. I would be interested in knowing any rules you guys come up with as stated in post 1.
> 
> 
> ^_^



Yes and no. I believe the original idea was to see what people do to make a story come about. Whether or not it is a funny idea of a rule or a reality of the rule it is what makes those who write go on. Putting the drive or stages of our self imposed rules into ten, more or less, numbered individual statements which might be humorous or even serious, is what was asked. 

What rules do you follow to complete your work? 

Can you make ten?

Also I believe the statement, one of the others said, This thread was derived to create a discussion about one point or other, and how far will it go. Maine point is there is no wrong way, no set of rules, and no wrong opinion. The set of rules or guidelines any one of us follow is that which makes the story flow, go, or fail for us. 

If mine is to sit and punch letters out on the keyboard and find a rhythm of words that compile a story then that is my mews. The movie "After the Dark" describes this idea at one point. (I will not go into it, it is a philosophy thing)

Otherwise it is the ruled structure of the outliner, or the lay back free flow of the pantser that gives them the drive to write.

In either case it is up to the individual in which manner they choose. Can it in any way be put into ten rules to follow? Maybe.


----------



## Greimour

Hmmm.

I am a pants writer. I have varying degrees of writing out there. Some on this forum in fact that are perfect examples of a first time write - and others that are perfect examples of 'how not to do it'

I won't link them here, I have them linked in other threads or people can just randomly find them by chance. 

However.

When I write a story out for the first time, it literally boils down to one scene. A character performing an act - I literally see as if it was on TV or something - or before my very eyes in real life - what is happening and why. 
- The act can be standing still and taking in a view; falling out of bed; supping cold coffee in a cafe whilst watching a man read his paper, or; a woman reading a manuscript older than the knowledge of writing. 

My entire 'plotting' or 'outlining' is figuring out how to write that scene. Once the first sentence or two are written in a way I like, I read the two sentences back to myself one more time and continue. I do not stop again until my mind blanks, I feel like having a smoke, a coffee, use the toilet or go eat. The writing can continue for minutes or hours - but it generally maintains the flow of those first two sentences.

My problem comes when I revisit a piece. It's not that I can't continue from where I stopped - just that I can't continue with the same style of writing - or I feel like whatever I write is alien to the story - a different mood or voice or something, I am not sure exactly.

One day, at random, I will be looking through old work and I will happen across one of my old unfinished pieces and my fingers will just pick up where they left off - and on the story goes.

- Yes, sometimes I need to edit, rewrite or revise... sometimes I stop for a little light research like which is starboard and which is port on a ship... but on average, my work is on par to my piece in 'Spontaneous Creative Writing' ... which was a seat of my pants scene thought up on the spot with no editing barring the fixing of a single typo.

For me, it is not that I can't plot - it's that I prefer to be the reader of my own story. I want my characters to go where they want, do what they want. I don't know their objectives more than any one else.

Sometimes however, my writing can be simply the life story of a character... or several or even a hundred characters. Then, one day at random, the MC of a seat of my pants story will meet someone and instantly a character I created in the past will come forth saying "It's me they meet, I am perfect to step in here." and all of a sudden, that character with a life history now has a story to belong to.

That's me anyway.

I can edit and revise a single piece a hundred times... I can write another and not need to change anything except typing errors - just the way it goes sometimes.


****


So for me, as a preferred pants writer:

I would say "I am not very good at plotting, but I am able to a degree that is useful"
or
"I am a seat of the pants writer, my words seem to type themselves. I have plotted before though."

There is one story where I plotted the events and so forth from Start to End - character objectives, hardships, life lessons - then wrote out different scenes at different stages in the story to varying levels of depths... some being close to how I imagined it would literally be and some a vague outline of what is happening. Final fight scenes, conclusion, etc...
That story is still in my WIP file... but so far, I have probably got 500k words in just my notes, character bios, land history etc... another 200k words in peoples history, evolution history, religious histories ...

^ I don't think I will ever finish that piece. I think it is probably my very own *Silmarillion* but I don't plan on sharing it with the world.


----------



## spartan928

I write about pants but map it out ahead of time. Guess that makes me a plotting pantser.


----------



## Ixarku

shadowwalker said:


> "This is what works for _me _"




I think this is what we've _all _been saying, with varying degrees of vehemence.  :smile:

I do agree that it is very important for writers to try different methods.  It's only through the doing that we discover what works and what doesn't for each of us.  And, in turn, how we each come up with our own "10 Rules."  (See what I did there?)

And, for the record, folks, I don't have a problem with "pantsing."  I don't assume that it leads to mass confusion or poorer quality work.  It's quite obvious that it works well for some people, and in varying circumstances.  But I would find it very difficult to believe that any writer doesn't do _some _amount of planning.  After all, we're not blank slates; the words don't just automatically flow from our fingertips without thought as soon as our fingers touch the keyboard.  Planning is just a matter of degree -- whether you start with just a few vague ideas locked in your mind or you write out a detailed outline nearly as complex as the finished story.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Ixarku said:


> But I would find it very difficult to believe that any writer doesn't do _some _amount of planning.  After all, we're not blank slates; the words don't just automatically flow from our fingertips without thought as soon as our fingers touch the keyboard.



Well..believe it or not, this is almost exactly what happened to me when I started writing my book.

There was a small nugget of an idea floating around in my head. It was nothing more than a few lines of dialogue and the bare bones of a location.

A friend convinced me to write it out and I wound up with about 500 words.  A year later, there had been nothing else. Then, I opened the file one night, and an idea for the story hit me. I had planned nothing, had no idea what to do, right up until that moment. 

I did a couple thousand words in a couple of hours or so. 

I will admit to having only one plan (besides actually finishing) as far as the book goes. I know what the end is going to be. But only the last few lines. How the characters are going to get there is still a mystery to me.


----------



## Ixarku

That's wild.  I don't think you can get much more bare-bones than that.  Honestly, I wish I could write in that fashion, but it's not the way I'm built.  I've learned that the hard way.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Ixarku said:


> That's wild.  I don't think you can get much more bare-bones than that.  Honestly, I wish I could write in that fashion, but it's not the way I'm built.  I've learned that the hard way.



It's equally wild to me that someone can sit down and write out most of the story before ever even _starting_ to write the story itself. 

I imagine I would be _able_ to sit down and make an outline. I just know that if I did, the characters would basically give me the middle finger as they went along and did whatever the hell they wanted anyway. LOL


----------



## Ixarku

Well, I admit that I'm wary of falling into the "analysis versus paralysis" trap.  (There's another one that makes a good rule.)  Right now, every time I sit down and think, "OK, I'm just going to jump right in on the scene and start pounding away," I have a moment where I freeze and think, "Oh, hell!  I forgot that I didn't deal with XYZ!  I don't know how I want to do this."  And then I stop, switch over, and work out some detail that turns out to be important.  I have doubts that I'm really just procrastinating, but when I look back over my notes, almost every time, I've concluded that The Work Is Good And It Is Necessary.  And I keep on trucking.  Self-doubt is a defining characteristic for me, but my instincts tell me that I'm doing what I need to do.


----------



## W.Goepner

You know in my  style of pantsing. What you find you must do in outline form I do in my head. But on the fly. I have one called "Never Dive Alone" I have told the highlights to a friend and he looked at me and said write it, I would read it. All those highlights are still there but I am stuck trying to put them into form. Can you believe that? I know the whole story and even the ending words. I sit down open the file and block. 

I am stuck trying to write the equipment failure that causes the disaster on a maintenance platform within the off shore oil fields. It sucks. I have sat for untold time and number of times trying to deal with the one scene.

But to write it out in outline form will not get me past that one hump. 

It is a high pressure hydraulics failure, that cuts the lift controls to the the habitat of the divers, causing it to fall into the water after bouncing off the platform. It is the hydraulics failure I am stuck at. I can visualize it and I know what a high pressure hydraulic leak can do. I just cannot formulate it into words.

Oh well that is one story if ever I can get it to just go... who knows.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

W.Goepner said:


> You know in my  style of pantsing. What you find you must do in outline form I do in my head. But on the fly. I have one called "Never Dive Alone" I have told the highlights to a friend and he looked at me and said write it, I would read it. All those highlights are still there but I am stuck trying to put them into form. Can you believe that? I know the whole story and even the ending words. I sit down open the file and block.
> 
> I am stuck trying to write the equipment failure that causes the disaster on a maintenance platform within the off shore oil fields. It sucks. I have sat for untold time and number of times trying to deal with the one scene.
> 
> But to write it out in outline form will not get me past that one hump.
> 
> It is a high pressure hydraulics failure, that cuts the lift controls to the the habitat of the divers, causing it to fall into the water after bouncing off the platform. It is the hydraulics failure I am stuck at. I can visualize it and I know what a high pressure hydraulic leak can do. I just cannot formulate it into words.
> 
> Oh well that is one story if ever I can get it to just go... who knows.



Can you describe it in words when you are talking it out?

If so, get yourself a voice recorder. Tell the story to the recorder. Type it out later.


----------



## W.Goepner

T.S.Bowman said:


> It's equally wild to me that someone can sit down and write out most of the story before ever even _starting_ to write the story itself.
> 
> I imagine I would be _able_ to sit down and make an outline. I just know that if I did, the characters would basically give me the middle finger as they went along and did whatever the hell they wanted anyway. LOL



If you ever see your characters doing that will you let me know I want to see it.  Really I understand you there. I, fortunately am not that bound to the pantsing, I just cannot fathom the outline. I could probably do better structure with an outline. But seeing that I was never able to make a working outline, I don't know.


----------



## W.Goepner

T.S.Bowman said:


> Can you describe it in words when you are talking it out?
> 
> If so, get yourself a voice recorder. Tell the story to the recorder. Type it out later.



ah, um, Dit dit dit... Whew excuse me. Yes, kind of, sort of, maybe. 

I try to talk that one scene out and run into the same issues. 

I think I need to sit and talk to someone that knows hydraulics and the type of lift I am trying to use. I believe my issue is I am trying to mix a winch style lift with a hydraulic drive system and I am not sure it is able to work. It should and it probably is in use today, I just am not able to wrap my mind on or in to it. 

I need to take my own advice and look it up.

I will try to record it maybe that will work for me also.

Thank you.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

If nothing else, it's at least worth a try.

I do think finding a hydraulics expert is a great idea though. If nothing else, it will set your mind at ease about the design.


----------



## W.Goepner

Just went surfing the Google. Found that there are the type of lifts I am thinking of all over the market. 

It has been my self doubt that has held me back. Wandering if it will be a feasible or plausible application. 

I hate my self doubt. "I am My own worst enemy."

Thank you. If I had not thought to heed my own advice, by you suggesting for me to voice record, I would have stumbled about for who knows how long. 

I have just as much difficulties recording as I do outlining. 

Not Joking.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

W.Goepner said:


> I hate my self doubt. "I am My own worst enemy."



Boy do I know THAT feeling.



> Thank you. If I had not thought to heed my own advice, by you suggesting for me to voice record, I would have stumbled about for who knows how long.
> 
> I have just as much difficulties recording as I do outlining.



Happy to help.


----------



## shadowwalker

Ixarku said:


> But I would find it very difficult to believe that any writer doesn't do _some _amount of planning.  After all, we're not blank slates; the words don't just automatically flow from our fingertips without thought as soon as our fingers touch the keyboard.  Planning is just a matter of degree -- whether you start with just a few vague ideas locked in your mind or you write out a detailed outline nearly as complex as the finished story.



Sigh. This is what drives me nuts. People who say "Oh yeah, you say you don't plan, but - you really do.". Plan one sentence ahead - "See? You're really a planner...". It's like the friend who insists that you really do like that gal/guy, but just won't admit it. You could loathe the gal/guy, but that friend "knows better". 

Yeah.


----------



## Sam

Ixarku said:


> And, for the record, folks, I don't have a problem with "pantsing."  I don't assume that it leads to mass confusion or poorer quality work.  It's quite obvious that it works well for some people, and in varying circumstances.  But I would find it very difficult to believe that any writer doesn't do _some _amount of planning.  After all, we're not blank slates; the words don't just automatically flow from our fingertips without thought as soon as our fingers touch the keyboard.  Planning is just a matter of degree -- whether you start with just a few vague ideas locked in your mind or you write out a detailed outline nearly as complex as the finished story.



I find it very difficult to believe that a 400-ton plane can lift into the air, but it happens every hour of the day. 

Just because you find something difficult to conceive, it doesn't make it impossible or improbable. I've never written a plan in my entire life. That goes for the twelve novels I've written, numerous articles, over a hundred academic essays, and two theses. I have never planned. I never will plan. I sit down and write. If you're trying to tell me that the ideas which pop into my head while I'm writing are 'planning', then you are clutching at straws. It's like saying if you unplug a toilet you're a plumber.


----------



## Ixarku

Sam said:


> I find it very difficult to believe that a 400-ton plane can lift into the air, but it happens every hour of the day.
> 
> Just because you find something difficult to conceive, it doesn't make it impossible or improbable. I've never written a plan in my entire life. That goes for the twelve novels I've written, numerous articles, over a hundred academic essays, and two theses. I have never planned. I never will plan. I sit down and write. If you're trying to tell me that the ideas which pop into my head while I'm writing are 'planning', then you are clutching at straws. It's like saying if you unplug a toilet you're a plumber.




That is not what I'm saying.  If you find yourself walking around randomly and a thought pops into your head that, "Wow, this character would do _this,_" or "This scene should flow into this other scene," and then later you put that into your story -- then you've been planning.  Planning doesn't have to be some kind of formal ritualized process.  You guys keep ignoring that I'm stating that planning is done in degrees.  It's not on or off; it's a continuum.  Formal outlining is at the far end of planning; free thinking is at the other end.  You can't seriously expect me to believe that you simply flip a switch, and you shut off the creative half of your brain during the day, and it's only when you sit down behind a keyboard that the creative half suddenly comes on.  If you're consciously thinking about your story or your work, then you're probably planning.  Writing doesn't happen in a vacuum.

The reverse side is that those of us who work from outlines also always "pants" to a degree.  Only the most anal retentive of persons would document the full information of a scene in an outline.  The rest gets improvised when the scene is written.

It's not black or white, us versus them.  It's all shades of gray, and where you fall in the spectrum can vary from day to day or minute to minute.


----------



## Gavrushka

I think you misunderstand what a pantser is, Ixarku. It's a bit difficult to read how you explain those who don't plan, probably do, and we just don't realise. 

There is a way, whereby a panster can bypass conscious pre-considered thought and write from spontaneous creativity. I get that you don't get that, but it doesn't mean that you have to redefine what a pantser does in terms of your own sphere of understanding.

Knowing there are things you don't know, grasshopper, is the first step on the road to true enlightenment.


----------



## Ixarku

Gavrushka said:


> I think you misunderstand what a pantser is, Ixarku. It's a bit difficult to read how you explain those who don't plan, probably do, and we just don't realise.
> 
> There is a way, whereby a panster can bypass conscious pre-considered thought and write from spontaneous creativity. I get that you don't get that, but it doesn't mean that you have to redefine what a pantser does in terms of your own sphere of understanding.
> 
> Knowing there are things you don't know, grasshopper, is the first step on the road to true enlightenment.




I understand what pantsing is.  But maybe some of you guys do walk in a constant state of fugue, with no idea what you're going to do until it spontaneously happens.  The point I'm making is that there are no firm boundaries.



EDIT - Folks, at this point, I'm going to exit the discussion.  I don't want to continue arguing.  I've said what I wish to say; as always, everyone is free to agree or disagree as they wish.


----------



## shadowwalker

Ixarku said:


> I understand what pantsing is.  But maybe some of you guys do walk in a constant state of fugue, with no idea what you're going to do until it spontaneously happens.  The point I'm making is that there are no firm boundaries.



Well, for those who actually want to understand what "pantsing" is, there is no "fugue state". There is, however, precisely an ability to write something spontaneously, and then logically follow that thought, and the next, and the next. It's seeing a path and following it to see where it leads, and taking the turn at the crossroads based only on the fact that it could prove interesting. It's telling a child a story when they're tired of Goldilocks and the library's closed. It's improv. 



Ixarku said:


> EDIT - Folks, at this point, I'm going to exit the discussion.  I don't want to continue arguing.  I've said what I wish to say; as always, everyone is free to agree or disagree as they wish.



Well, you may want to just try to consider that those of us who are pantsers might actually understand the process better than someone who isn't. Just a thought.  But I know... :deadhorse:


----------



## Jeko

I don't like the 'planner' and 'pantser' definitions, Ixarhu; they make writing feel like a black/white process when it's far from being one.

But:



> You can't seriously expect me to believe that you simply flip a switch, and you shut off the creative half of your brain during the day, and it's only when you sit down behind a keyboard that the creative half suddenly comes on.



I do this, and I wouldn't be able to write if I didn't. When it's not time for me to write, i.e. during the day, I don't think about my WIP. When it _is _time for me to write, i.e. in the morning/at night, that's when, and only when, I think about my WIP. Of course, accidents happen; if something pop into my head, I make a note and then leave it. Those notes, however, are not planning. A plan is an intention to do something in a certain way; my notes are just scribbles of my thoughts.

That ability to 'flip a switch' is, IMO, a sign of a more disciplined writer. I'm still developing it myself. 



> I don't want to continue arguing



You don't have to view this as a debate; discussing an issue where people have different stances can greatly enrich those involved. Imagine what it would be like if everyone agreed - we'd hardly learn anything!


----------



## Sam

Ixarku said:


> That is not what I'm saying.  If you find yourself walking around randomly and a thought pops into your head that, "Wow, this character would do _this,_" or "This scene should flow into this other scene," and then later you put that into your story -- then you've been planning.  Planning doesn't have to be some kind of formal ritualized process.  You guys keep ignoring that I'm stating that planning is done in degrees.  It's not on or off; it's a continuum.  Formal outlining is at the far end of planning; free thinking is at the other end.  You can't seriously expect me to believe that you simply flip a switch, and you shut off the creative half of your brain during the day, and it's only when you sit down behind a keyboard that the creative half suddenly comes on.  If you're consciously thinking about your story or your work, then you're probably planning.  Writing doesn't happen in a vacuum.
> 
> The reverse side is that those of us who work from outlines also always "pants" to a degree.  Only the most anal retentive of persons would document the full information of a scene in an outline.  The rest gets improvised when the scene is written.
> 
> It's not black or white, us versus them.  It's all shades of gray, and where you fall in the spectrum can vary from day to day or minute to minute.



If you think that is planning, you really have no idea what planning is. Or, for that matter, what pantsing is.

Edit: And, yes, I do turn my creativity on and off as needed. That's part and parcel of being a writer.


----------



## W.Goepner

Ixarku said:


> I understand what pantsing is.  But maybe some of you guys do walk in a constant state of fugue, with no idea what you're going to do until it spontaneously happens.  The point I'm making is that there are no firm boundaries.
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT - Folks, at this point, I'm going to exit the discussion.  I don't want to continue arguing.  I've said what I wish to say; as always, everyone is free to agree or disagree as they wish.



I actually hope you come back to read these.

I get your point that you cannot fathom the idea that some of us do not plan as you do. I even accept the idea of micro planning. A thought that leads to a plot extension or even a character motivation. *I* think we all have those moments. Are they planning? Not really, it is more the spontaneous idea.

I have this problem, I get board with the repetitive actions of labor intensive jobs, so I think as I do. Once I find the rhythm of the job I go into my imagination. There are thousands of pages of material that has flowed and drifted through my mind in this manner. Then as I begin to write it either comes back to me or ads to the flow elsewhere.  (I guess I am a bit autistic in this manner)

I have been told many of time to record these thoughts. I have tried, the recording devices pick up too much of the background noise and I cannot make heads or tails of what I have said. If this is planning then I do it. BUT it is in *no way* an outline. Which, I might add, IS the type of planning that most pantsers *do not* do.

Those that turn off the creative mind when it is not appropriate, Fantastic! I can and do it when it must be done. But let me get board.


----------



## W.Goepner

KyleColorado said:


> Plotting ahead of time may have felt restrictive to Bradbury (who is one of my favorite authors of all time, by the way. What a master of prose!), but it can be freeing to others.
> 
> Science has made great leaps and bounds in explaining the different types of mental processes, and how certain individuals prefer approaching things in one way versus another. Suffice to say: Bradbury was predominantly a *divergent thinker*. Others (the plotters, like myself and Ixarku) are generally *convergent thinkers*.
> 
> Neither approach is wrong, but a divergent thinker will likely find plotting restrictive and artificial, while a convergent thinker will likely find pants-ing aimless and unproductive.
> 
> And then you'll have the individuals who are partly in both categories and approach things with a fluidity that resembles ambidexterity, pants-ing and plotting simultaneously to varying degrees.
> 
> What works for one can be kryptonite to another. The main thing to keep in mind is that we're all our own superheroes. :encouragement:



You see? This right here is exactly the truth. Each person has there own way. be it pantsing or outlining. Either one, of course there is the outpantser (LOL I thought that might catch peoples attention) One who as Kyle pointed out can do both in some manner. 

To argue that a pantser plots to some degree or a outliner free writes to another, is mute and *POINTLESS**!* 

*I* for one find it very difficult to outline, but I do in varying degrees think a point through before writing, *AS I,* can assume some other pantsers *might* also. Some times it is easier to think a point through, then come to a personal understanding of it and then write it. Like; "How would he/she say this/that, or do that/this." Then "Oh OK!" and off they go.

Where an outliner will have to take what is not in the outline and fill in the blanks with description, action, statements, or whatever from thought flow. Otherwise they are writing the whole story out in the outline and that would be pantsing anyway. LOL 

Come on now think about it. There is varying degrees of both in each. Some greater than others. You might not, he might not, she might not. But some do. If *you don't* then so what. I am not talking about *YOU* so get over it!


----------



## Greimour

The pantser vs planner conversation was fun. I enjoyed reading it.

As a Pants writer, I have to agree with pretty much everything Shadow and Sam said, but I don't fail to understand your point of view Ixarku. Thinking logically, I do see that your point is valid and pretty hard to refute with the same kind of logic - but then I considered my writing. 

I plan what will happen in my book as much as a footballer plans what minute/s he will score in. (Soccer)
*I will score in the 57th minute thanks to penalty and 87th minute from free kick and then finally, 1 minute into overtime, I will score again after dribbling past two defenders*
^ What a crock! He acts and reacts for 45 minutes, has a small break, then acts and reacts for another 45 minutes + overtime. 

That's how I write. I walk on to the pitch (Sit at my computer) wait for the whistle (Load my writing program) and begin.
After a while, I take a break (coffee or toilet usually, sometimes a smoke)
I return and continue from where I left off.

Like a teams progress is decided over a season (many games) so is my writing. I don't finish it in one game, but there is a full season to be played and I take each game as it comes in the same way and process as the first. I may want to finish at the top of the table, but by the end of the season, I might be headed for relegation.

Just how things go.

I leave the planning to the coaches and managers, as a player, I just get on with the job itself and leave all that worrying to other people. It only affects my game in a negative way and I don't need its hindrance. 
Like writing - it works for you, but it doesn't for me... working without a plan may be inconceivable for you, but for me; living the story as I write it is far more fun than the stress of adhering to thought out plans..


----------



## Kyle R

Nice analogy, Greimour. I like it.

Though, my perspective, as a plotter, is of course, different.

I don't view my stories as soccer games. I think that analogy, while a good one, isn't entirely the way I see it. For me, stories are more like construction.

Imagine, for example, you're looking to build a high-rise in the financial district of a populous city. Of course, you're not a builder yourself, but you have the financial means to hire a company to do this for you.

On the one hand, you'll have Company A: *Intuitive Builders, Inc.* When pitching their services to you, they tell you that the building will end up however it ends up. It might be broad and short, it might be tall and narrow. It might have trellises or it might be round and sleek as an egg. The construction might take a long time, or it might be done rather quickly. 

They are experienced and change plans as they go, designing things organically, and creatively, with both skill and precision. Whatever the outcome is, they assure you that the construction of it will be sturdy, safe, and fully functional.

Then you have Company B, *Schematic Builders, Inc.* During their pitch to you, their team of architects unroll large schematics, diagraming how your building will look upon completion. Every angle has been measured, every trimming has been accounted for. The costs and duration are calculated with a close estimate of project starting date, and completion date. Your building will be _this_ tall_, __this_ wide, and have _this_ many windows. If there are things you want to change, they're able to do so, and won't start building until you are satisfied with how the project will turn out. If desired, they can keep the floors empty, for you to hire your own interior decorator. Or, if you wish, they can design each floor for you, as well. 

However the project is designed, they assure you this is how it will end up. They are experienced and stick to the plans, designing things as drawn out, with both skill and precision. It will be sturdy, safe, and fully functional.


In the end, having assurances from reliable references that both companies do excellent work, the decision will come down to what your motivations are for building.

Are you looking to create something adventurous and unexpected? Are you looking to build, but you don't yet know what you want your building to look like? Then you should probably go with Company A: *Intuitive Builders, Inc.* You might end up with something completely unexpected, something wonderful and unique—that's part of their charm and skill set.

Or perhaps you have a more specific idea in mind. You know the kind of building you want to build, you have a vision of the structure in your mind, its glimmering edges as solid in your imagination as the steel they will be built with. You might even know how you want each floor to be decorated. If so, you should probably go with Company B: *Schematic Builders, Inc.* They've got the chops to construct your dream building to your specifications, and they'll make sure you get what you wanted.

Me, when I write, I know the structure of the stories I want to tell. I have specific scenes in mind and I know exactly where I want them to go. I have plot points in mind and I know how far into the story, percentage-wise, they belong, and I will be _unhappy_ if they occur 10% earlier, or 10% later. For these reasons (and others), I'm the type of person who would hire Company B, and it's also the reason why I'm a plotter. :encouragement:


----------



## Greimour

Agreed Kyle,

I used the football analogy because there is a lot of freedom to be found on a pitch. You make decisions on the spot, instantly and sometimes without conscious effort or thought. Your situation is ongoing and developing by the millisecond - the actions and reactions are determined accordingly.

The coach can tell you what to do during a corner, but defenders may have been given equal instruction of how to defend against that specific type of corner attack. 
Improvisation is required and no amount of training or practice can make you predict the future - only prepared to face what the future brings when the moment arrives.

With construction, such as a building - if you fail to plan you plan to fail. The building could literally crumble as you build it causing unsafe working conditions and death etc...

I can still follow your view though.

As a child, building with lego, I didn't plan what I would build ahead of time. I put the building blocks together and when it started taking a shape I would find I had a castle - a replica of the Eiffel Tower - or a space craft to contend with the enterprise. 
Another child may have begun constructing those same lego blocks with the plan to recreate the Taj Mahal, Buckingham Palace or Big Ben... 

So yes, I can see where you are coming from... that's why I agree.

I am just of the first description, as pointed out. I build and marvel at what it becomes... rather than plan and then evaluate it's success based on how accurate the construction is from the original design.


----------



## Sam

The construction analogy is weak . . . at best. Of course you need proper planning when you're building a house or a flat or a 90-storey skyscraper. Only a fool would suggest otherwise. You don't, however, need a plan to write . . . _anything. _If anyone says you do, let them explain how someone can be twice trad-published author, the recipient of a BA and MA in English literature, and all without ever penning a word of a plan in his entire lifetime. 

There are some people who can play a song (on guitar, piano, etcetera) without learning the sheet music. They play by ear. Why, then, is it so difficult to believe that a writer can do the equivalent with a piece of written work?


----------



## Kevin

You could be following sets of 'building plans' that you are so familiar with you don't even realize the patterns are those you've seen before. You don't have to write down a form ahead of time to follow one. You don't even have to 'know' you're following it, you just do.


----------



## Kyle R

Sam said:


> Of course you need proper planning when you're building a house or a flat or a 90-storey skyscraper.



Why? Why would someone need proper planning when building a 90-story skyscraper? Why not pants it?

For me, a story is no different (emphasis on _for me_). For Greimour, stories are more like a soccer game (emphasis on _for Greimour_). For you, writing doesn't ever require a single word of a plan (emphasis on _for you_). 

I believe in plotting, and I have my reasons. You might disagree with my reasons, and that's okay. That's the beauty of writing—everyone has the freedom to choose the philosophy that resonates most with them. :encouragement:


----------



## shadowwalker

Kevin said:


> You could be following sets of 'building plans' that you are so familiar with you don't even realize the patterns are those you've seen before. You don't have to write down a form ahead of time to follow one. You don't even have to 'know' you're following it, you just do.



Maybe it's just me, but that's sounding suspiciously like "You say you don't plan - but you really do...". _Please _say that's not what you're implying.


----------



## Sam

KyleColorado said:


> That's the beauty of writing—everyone has the freedom to choose the philosophy that resonates most with them. :encouragement:



Obviously not, since several people in this thread are attempting to imply that I and other pantsers aren't really pantsing and, in fact, are planning. That was my case in point. To say that if an idea pops into my head during the day it becomes me 'planning' is ridiculous and bordering on asinine, but yet it's been said in this very thread. 

I'm not sure what has to be said to make it clear that there are people in the world who can write devoid of any plan whatsoever.


----------



## Kyle R

Sam said:


> I'm not sure what has to be said to make it clear that there are people in the world who can write devoid of any plan whatsoever.



On that we can both agree. Ray Bradbury, one of my favorite authors, made a career of doing so. :encouragement:


----------



## stormageddon

Sam said:


> Obviously not, since several people in this thread are attempting to imply that I and other pantsers aren't really pantsing and, in fact, are planning.


Nobody was trying to imply anything of the sort from what I can tell, there seems to have been a series of misunderstandings caused by non-explicit phrasing.


I think what constitutes planning is quite subjective - I never formally plan, but I do a lot of forethought so that I actually know where my story is going. I'd consider that planning, whereas some people wouldn't. Who really cares? It's completely irrelevant to writing, so long as we all know what works for our own purposes, and a very odd thing to argue about, in my opinion.


Anyway, can we get back to the original topic of the thread? It was rather entertaining, and the planning vs pantsing discussion can surely find a home elsewhere.


----------



## bazz cargo

> Why? Why would someone need proper planning when building a 90-story skyscraper? Why not pants it?


Even with a plan I would probably end up with a 90 story basement.


----------



## W.Goepner

Ahem! *Tap Tap Tap!!* It this thing on.

Formal apology here. I let one or more comments get the better of me and *Flamed* like a spoiled brat. Not even heading my own words. Sorry, Sorry, Sorry. 

I see my Spewing of spleen did not hinder anyone from saying and doing as they wish anyway. But I must and will admit I was in the wrong to spew the bile I regurgitated within this discussion.

Now to subject of the planners. Wrap your mind arround this and leave of the "You plann even though you don't know it Crap" 

Planning: 


A scheme, program, or method worked out beforehand for the accomplishment of an objective.
a plan of attack. 
A proposed or tentative project or course of action.
had no plans for the evening. 
A systematic arrangement of elements or important parts; a configuration or outline.
a seating plan; the plan of a story. 
v. verb


To formulate a scheme or program for the accomplishment, enactment, or attainment of.
plan a campaign. 
To have as a specific aim or purpose; intend.
They plan to buy a house. 
To draw or make a graphic representation of. 

Synonyms


blueprint - design - project - scheme - strategy 


NONE OF THAT is what a Pantser does when writing, Any forethought that one might have in or around their day is just that forethought. *IF!* You wish to consider that forethought as planning then PLEASE Keep it to your self. For we do not.

Sorry again I really do not like this arguing over the tiniest point of thought at any moment is planning. it is moot.


----------



## Kevin

> but that's sounding suspiciously like "You say you don't plan - but you really do...". _Please _say that's not what you're implying.


 My un-planned programming would say that you're putting words in my mouth. lol. I was just trying to say that our brains follow patterns whether we like it or not. Just an opinion...
 Ok. Group hug?


----------



## W.Goepner

Terry D said:


> Not to be pedantic, but I think you mean 'moot';
> 
> *moot*
> 
> 1  [moot] *adjective**1.*open to discussion or debate; debatable; doubtful: _a moot point._
> 
> *2.*of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.
> 
> Number 2 fits pretty well here.



Touche, 

I forge on in a phonic euphoria type stupor most the time. Not thinking of the right word but only on the sound.

Thank you I stand corrected.


----------



## W.Goepner

Kevin said:


> My un-planned programming would say that you're putting words in my mouth. lol. I was just trying to say that our brains follow patterns whether we like it or not. Just an opinion...
> Ok. Group hug?



I had a art design toy as a youngster. A series of gears with holes in them to put pen or pencil through. By tacking one down and using another you drew patterns. Quite nicely. You see a pattern like rhythm, is not a design or plan. Yes it is measured, quite often it even looks and sounds planned, But it is not. We Pantsers, (sticking my neck out here) might start with an idea, *What would this be like?* From there the story runs until the idea stops or some sort of interruption happens. Some times it is hard for us to find the same thought to continue at a later time.

Point; My mother is unable to walk more than six paces before her stride changes and a new rhythm takes over. I was in the Army and I dread having to follow her or walk in close to her.

Also I have a greater issue. I am a bit obsessive compulsive, Where I take a small bag of M&Ms and find the least amount of one color, Match the rest of the colors to that one, and continue down until I have one or two colors with "X" numbers. Then I eat them in reverse, "X" numbers first to the full equal numbers. (with a three pound bag I do it by the 1/4 to  1/2 cup)  Because of this, I feel I could do better writing *IF* I were to outline. But I am too much a free thinker and cannot fathom or formulate the outline.

Damn, I am a mixed up mongrel.


----------



## W.Goepner

Terry D said:


> Not to be pedantic, but I think you mean 'moot';
> 
> *moot*
> 
> 1  [moot] *adjective**1.*open to discussion or debate; debatable; doubtful: _a moot point._
> 
> *2.*of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.
> 
> Number 2 fits pretty well here.



LOL fixed it


----------



## shadowwalker

Following patterns does not mean planning. Following patterns means that we may write the same types of stories - but the story itself is not planned. Following patterns means we may have the same types of characters - but we do not write character sheets before hand.

Generic here: 

Please please please quit trying to insinuate that we don't know what the heck we are doing but you do. It's insulting and presumptuous. (And we _really _shouldn't have to keep saying this.)


----------



## Sam

As the previous thread was getting way off-topic, I've moved all the planning/pantsing posts to a new thread. Discuss at length, if you so wish.


----------



## Sam

stormageddon said:


> Nobody was trying to imply anything of the sort from what I can tell, there seems to have been a series of misunderstandings caused by non-explicit phrasing.



Yes, they _did _imply that. One person went as far as proclaiming that getting an idea while you walk around is 'planning'. I suppose to them, slipping on a patch of ice on a bitter cold morning makes them a skater. 



> Anyway, can we get back to the original topic of the thread? It was rather entertaining, and the planning vs pantsing discussion *can surely find a home elsewhere.*



As it has.


----------



## Gavrushka

I'd never realised that such a topic would galvanise people as strongly as a religious/political debate. - It comes close to amusing when you see the two sides throwing 'likes' at their candidates, when they think they've scored a major hit on the enemy. (Yes I was doing it too!) *snickers*

The only reason I'm a pantser is because I can't plot... - Oh I've tried endlessly, but as soon as I write, I end up moving so far from my original intention as to invalidate all I'd done. - I ASSUME plotters are able to stick with their plan, so all is well and good.

Have I left anything out?


----------



## shadowwalker

Gavrushka said:


> I'd never realised that such a topic would galvanise people as strongly as a religious/political debate.



It goes that way every time you get someone who refuses to accept what pantsing really is. Then the debate is not so much about pantsing/planning as it is about getting people to acknowledge their own ignorance.


----------



## bookmasta

These types of conversations particularly annoy me. I haven't read through most of the replies on this thread and I don't think I will. My reasoning is simple. I believe they distract from the actual goal of writing and rather, discuss the craft through two different facets in what is already a played out topic on the various forums I've come across. On the opinion of 'pantsing' vs. 'outlining' I've done both and still do. I do not prefer one over the other. For some projects I like to lay it all out and plan my story while referencing factual points that will need to be researched and planned for. When pantsing I let the story unfold and come to me as I write it. Neither method is better than the other. They're merely two different aspects through which writers use to ultimately come to the same goal of writing. However, person preferences vary from person to person. Not everyone will see things the same as everyone else and so, its important to find what works for you. Which is why I encourage writers to try both methods for themselves and see what works rather than rejecting one without giving another a chance. Secondly, its not only importantly to at least try both so you have a general knowledge of both, but also to increase your depth as a writer as well. Just in outlining there are a few different 'methods' that you can use to plot your book, such as the snowflake method. I tend to write most of these off, but in recent months have started trying a few of them simply for the reason I mention above, to become familiar with the different options presented to me as a writer and secondly, adding as much depth to my craft as I can. Which I why I also started writing poetry and experimenting with different plot devices in the story stories I write on the side. 

That's pretty much all I have to say on this topic, and normally I don't reply to threads like these. Its like the debate of show vs. telling IMO. Which, ultimately, is pointless when it comes to actually writing.


----------



## Sam

This isn't an argument about which is better; this is trying to convince people that pantsing actually exists and that those who do it aren't all planners unbeknownst of themselves. 

_That's _the issue here.


----------



## Jeko

> This isn't an argument about which is better; this is trying to convince people that pantsing actually exists and that those who do it aren't all planners unbeknownst of themselves.
> 
> _That's the issue here._



This is another reason why I don't like the two definitions. IMO, these issues might not crop up so much if people didn't have to put a 'planner' or 'pantser' label on everything. I have the same issue with denominations of Christianity. When I ask someone what kind of Christian they are, they usually just give me a word. Then I ask them the same thing again, and eventually we actually make a conversation about it.

I'm sure some people plan without realizing it, but I don't care. Trying to make visible any subconscious process defeats the point of it being subconscious. However you think you write, that's how you write. 

(also, doing research into the word 'pantser' seems to show that it originated from NaNoWriMo, and therefore doesn't have to have anything to do with anything outside of that sphere)


----------



## shadowwalker

Cadence said:


> I'm sure some people plan without realizing it



And that I can agree with - _some _people do. And frankly, you could point out the planning and then it's obvious to them. But it's the stubborn insistence that _everybody _does this that drives me up a wall. It's almost as if people are trying to validate their method by this inclusion. "My method is right - but if they're doing it differently, maybe it's wrong! But it can't be wrong because it works for me - so they must be doing the same thing and just won't admit it.". I call that the "I Always Win Logic"...


----------



## Apple Ice

I suppose I'm a pantser, I have loads of ideas bullet-pointed but only ever know the end and nothing before that. Then I just free-style until I find out where I want to go. However, on occasion I've found to plan is essential because I write myself in to corners with certain stories and therefore need a rough outline. Committing myself to one wholeheartedly would probably be counter-productive. Generally, I find Pantsing more comfortable and easier as regulating my writing makes it more of a chore.


----------



## voltigeur

The best advice I have received when I got back into writing was, "Don't let anyone dictate what your creative process should be."

While I am a Plotter I do allow for the flexibility to go with a better line if one comes up. When I "pants' it I end up rambling and tossing something that makes no sense. Give it a week I can't even remember what I was trying to say.

For those people that are intuitive and right brained, Pants away if that is what works.

The only wrong way is continuing to do something that doesn't work for you because someone else says you should.


----------



## Greimour

Gavrushka said:


> I'd never realised that such a topic would galvanise people as strongly as a religious/political debate. - It comes close to amusing when you see the two sides throwing 'likes' at their candidates, when they think they've scored a major hit on the enemy. (Yes I was doing it too!) *snickers*



That made me laugh, but I would like to point out that some "plotters" clicked *like* for pantsers, and vice-versa.

I don't think the enemy is the plotter in this case though - it (for me and a few others) was trying to open the minds of people in regards to; "we do not plan"

Call it seat of the pants writing, winging it, improvisation or anything else... I don't truly care. But calling what I do planning is like Sam said:
"akin to slipping on ice making you a skater" < paraphrasing.

I am glad the topic was moved to it's own discussion thread. +1 for that Sam.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Sam said:


> As the previous thread was getting way off-topic, I've moved all the planning/pantsing posts to a new thread. Discuss at length, if you so wish.



Thanks, Sam. 

Although the discussion of planning vs pantsing seems to get a bit heated at times, I do think it's something that is good to discuss.


----------



## kaufenpreis

Pantser v Planner? Why not both? I’m not copping out here, just suggesting a third option that I like to use. I tend to start off with a fairly loose plan, you know, main characters, ideas for scenes, how to escalate etc etc, and then I write to the points that I’ve made, allowing the characters to tell me the story. Every couple of days I’ll take a look at where the stories going and try and plan ahead, but just a little, otherwise it can be an exercise in herding cats. I find it works for me, and maybe a variation on it will work for you too. Keep on keeping on Jodie, all the best.


----------



## Greimour

kaufenpreis said:


> Pantser v Planner? Why not both? I’m not copping out here, just suggesting a third option that I like to use. I tend to start off with a fairly loose plan, you know, main characters, ideas for scenes, how to escalate etc etc, and then I write to the points that I’ve made, allowing the characters to tell me the story. Every couple of days I’ll take a look at where the stories going and try and plan ahead, but just a little, otherwise it can be an exercise in herding cats. I find it works for me, and maybe a variation on it will work for you too. Keep on keeping on Jodie, all the best.



I am not sure where that stands on the scale personally. Seems to be near the pivotal point of why the discussion gets heated:

"Plan by thought. Taking notes is planning. Jotting in notepads whilst walking around is planning." Etc...

There is sometimes only subtle differences between the planner and the seat of the pants writer. But take two extremes into consideration and the middle ground is as out of reach as the Horizon. (Kyle and I, case and point.)

Kyle plans with meticulous precision.

I plan as far as sitting at my computer and deciding to write something down in story format (prose)

...

I can take notes, and I do... an idea for a character on something I was writing a week ago... a scene that belongs to no story at all. I see those notes as nothing more than seat of my pants writing anyway. I didn't plan the scene, I imagined it and wrote it down. I don't then plan where that scene is going, I write where it goes as it happens, when it happens... instantly. 

For example:

I don't write:

Opening Scene: Character arguing with parents over birthday present.
Second Scene: Character angrily pacing bedroom and destroying objects within when his phone suddenly rings.
Scene Three: Character meets up with friend after hanging up the phone and together they witness a murder.

^ In such a scenario, I would have written down the argument scene as I watched it unfold in my head. I would have then continued the writing with him in his bedroom, etc... 

So, jotting down an idea or a note is just so I still have it in my mind when I transfer that same information to the PC - else I forget.

I was once 14,000 words int a WIP when I suddenly imagined a scene that wouldn't happen for a very long time. The non-entity enemy that had yet to be named, realized or discovered could be the protagonists hero. It was clear someone was pulling the strings, but the MC didn't know who. He ruled everyone out one by one for various reasons.. but the very first person he ruled out (because it made absolutely zero sense for it to be him - even to me) turned out to be the bad guy  - for reasons incredibly obvious by time I reached the scene I had just imagined. 

14,000 words into the story I had that epiphany, but the story wouldn't reveal it for a further 40,000 words or so... does that count as planning? An idea that I had mid creation of a work in progress? 
I didn't detail any scene's between the 14,000words to the moment of realization, I just learned that the bad guy would be realized and I knew who that bad guy was... finally... no plan to get from A to B though.

Where are the lines drawn?

The biggest argument are:

*"Pantsers have to do a lot of rewrites"* = common opinion. But we have to do no more nor less than planners.
*
"Even if you don't think you're planning, you are."* = OK, then when you think you're planning, your actually not. If your logic works, so does mine. You are merely managing your ideas in a way that allows you easier recollection or prompt your creative senses into a working gear - where as we do not need to perform such tasks to recall the information stored in our brains or give our creative senses the necessary kick-start. To argue one way or the other on this plane of logic is redundant and can easily digress into a contest of method superiority.

*"Writing without a plan is impossible."* = That's as true as needing a fork to eat... or needing shoes to run... or needing a nose to breathe... or needing nails to scratch an itch... and I could go on with equally ridiculous comments. You could argue that it's easier if you have those things... but then that's down to interpretation and opinion too. Try eating soup with a fork, or running on sand with shoes, or breathing through your mouth, or reaching an itch in the dead center of your back when a perfectly good back scratcher is in reach (or even a freakin' pencil for many of us writers)

***

Debates are good tools, that's why I like this thread. It is not only good for learning how other people act, think, feel and react.. but good for expanding your own mind and learning about opinions you never knew you yourself had. Such as I have learned things about myself and other members of this forum thanks to this debate - and that knowledge can and will probably be used in my writing at some stage. On a character or plot-line or in any other feasible manner in which that newly gained information may present itself.


----------



## stormageddon

I don't want to get sucked into this, because there are some people discussing this here that are very passionate about it, however,



Sam said:


> Yes, they _did _imply that. One person went as far as proclaiming that getting an idea while you walk around is 'planning'. I suppose to them, slipping on a patch of ice on a bitter cold morning makes them a skater.



I have to say, firstly that yes, it was implied, but it was clearly not deliberate (which is what you suggested with "trying to imply"), and it was never even hinted that pantsing was in some way inferior. More importantly, nobody who implied it did so vindictively, and yet many of the responses they received were less pleasant than they might have been. The specific post you refer to is simply a difference in what people consider constitutes planning, and in no way an inflammatory statement, nor indeed a proclamation - at worst, a suggestion. 

"The aim of Writing Forums is to provide a friendly, active literary community where you can talk to and make friends with other writers."

I do not think the direction this discussion has taken is in line with that. But it appears to be getting back on track - hopefully it will be left to do so.


----------



## Sam

> "The aim of Writing Forums is to provide a  friendly, active literary community where you can talk to and make  friends with other writers."
> 
> I do not think the direction this discussion has taken is in line with  that. But it appears to be getting back on track - hopefully it will be  left to do so.



That is a decision for the staff to make. As they have not yet made it, we are free to continue until such times as they do. Nowhere, and I speak from considerable experience here, does it say in the rules that one has to agree with everything someone else says. The only thing that could be levelled at this thread is that it is beginning to venture into the prohibited area of debate. It will be locked if it does, as per the rules, but until then I'll try everything in my power to make sure it doesn't turn into that. I hope everyone else will as well. 



> I have to say, firstly that yes, it was implied, but it was clearly not  deliberate (which is what you suggested with "trying to imply"), and it  was never even hinted that pantsing was in some way inferior.



You have inferred that I somewhere down the line have said that people considered pantsing inferior. I have done no such thing. My goal, from the start of this thread, has been to dissuade people from the opinion that pantsers are secretly planners. Nothing else. I would not be so presumptuous as to state that one is inferior to another. I am merely trying to make the point (for the umpteenth time) that there are writers who are able to sit and write an entire story without any form of plan _whatsoever. _And, furthermore, that those people will not need mass rewrites or create sub-par work because of that. That is all. I am not interested in debating which is better. Never have been. All I have tried to do is to stop people telling me how I write. I know full well how I write and nothing anyone says on the matter will ever change that. 

I am a pantser. I am not, nor will I ever be, a planner. Stop trying to make me one because you (generic) feel insecure about the fact that I (_et al._) can create stories without any form of prior legwork or planning.


----------



## shadowwalker

Agree with Sam. There would have been no heat - indeed, probably no derail - had some people not tried to tell others how they write, and continued to do so even when corrected. Maybe there's some little detail, some phrase not yet found, that will cause an epiphany for those folks and they will finally get it, but we'd probably have to write a whole treatise on the subject and there's no reason for it. Accept that we know what we do, just as we accept that you (generic) know what you do. That's all. I don't know why that's so difficult for some people.


----------



## Greimour

stormageddon said:


> "The aim of Writing Forums is to provide a friendly, active literary community where you can talk to and make friends with other writers.".



Lol Storm. Unfortunately, writers are very passionate and very opinionated people. No community can exist without conflict and a community of like-minded individuals is more likely to clash than any other. 

I think people getting passionate (even as much so as displayed in some comments on this thread) is a good thing. Getting heated up can cloud your judgement, but a second look once you have calmed down is a real eye opener. In my experience, that is when minds are most commonly changed or opened. The open mind can find understanding and in understanding you can find peace eternal. 

So - my opinion is that this thread hasn't crossed any boundaries. For me, this has been a good experience and I don't think I am entirely alone in that opinion.
In fact, I am more at ease with the kind of writer I am now than I was before - partly thanks to Sam. Though he is smarter than I (I have witnessed this to be true in his writings and comments etc..) and more skilled than I... I find comfort in his success, because if he can... I can. ^_^


----------



## ToriJ

I never heard the term "Pantsing" before I came to this forum. Every time I see the word I picture a person ripping off their pants and flapping it about as if they're waiting for a bull to come at it. I always just called it Improv or "going with the flow". Don't think I'd say it's the one and only true method around like Bradbury seems to be implying. It's whatever gets the job done for you.


----------



## stormageddon

I think all people were trying to say was "true pantsing is a difficult concept to get my head around", never that it wasn't a real thing.

And I'm sorry Sam, but it's utterly ridiculous to suggest that those who said that did so because they feel "insecure" due to the fact you can pants. Can you think of any reason why someone would feel that way? If not, it's likely that something has been poorly phrased or misunderstood somewhere along the way  Anyway, of course people disagree with each other all the time, it's part of the fun of life, but we could be calmer and less confrontational about it.

So perhaps what I'm saying is - give people the benefit of the doubt, and don't jump to conclusions. You say, Shadowwalker, that the derail would not have happened were it not for people telling others how they write. I would say rather that it was the fact that rather than ask for a clarification, an argument was leapt into, and that the folks you're referring to, as far as I can tell, do not exist, or do so beyond the bounds of this forum. And folks? There was only one person whose words might have been misinterpreted, if memory serves.

Greimour- I'm forced to agree with you largely  and I should say that large parts of it did not cross boundaries and were in fact quite interesting, but that there were also points that looked a lot like flaming, and I feel that while passion is hard to avoid, we do not have to be rude to one another (not saying you've been rude, if that sounds pointed).

Anyway, I'm gonna (try to) shut up now, because I'm almost certainly being irritating at this stage  sorry if I have, and know that no offence is ever intended.


----------



## shadowwalker

Well, perhaps next time someone tells you you're not really doing/feeling/saying what you know you are, you'll know how we felt. But yeah, no point going off on another derail about people misinterpreting words on the screen and how people didn't _really _mean what they said... :???:


----------



## Greimour

I like your brain Storm, can I eat it? ^_^

Personally, I can't fault any of the comments made in retaliation to other comments. All opinions have their own weight and just because I side with some comments against others - doesn't mean I dismiss those other comments entirely. (OK, in honesty, maybe I do... or maybe there is no maybe about it.) I tried to take a more political approach with my replies, but I was also eager to give enraged responses.

Without aiming to digress, allow me to show you my perspective on ONE of the issues, not all of them though: 





Ixarku said:


> I would find it very difficult to believe that any writer doesn't do _some _amount of planning. After all, we're not blank slates; the words don't just automatically flow from our fingertips without thought as soon as our fingers touch the keyboard. Planning is just a matter of degree -- whether you start with just a few vague ideas locked in your mind or you write out a detailed outline nearly as complex as the finished story.


 I don’t want to keep quoting Ixarku, but some of these comments couldn’t be taken any other way than how they were written.  It clearly stated that we are planning even if we think we aren’t. I took the political approach for a reply, but I definitely felt like giving a response that could have been construed as bad, nasty, unwarranted or flaming.
Lets take this comment:  





Ixarku said:


> That is not what I'm saying. If you find yourself walking around randomly and a thought pops into your head that, "Wow, this character would do _this,_" or "This scene should flow into this other scene," and then later you put that into your story -- then you've been planning. Planning doesn't have to be some kind of formal ritualized process. You guys keep ignoring that I'm stating that planning is done in degrees. It's not on or off; it's a continuum.


That, in no other terms clearly states: “Thinking is planning, so even though you think you’re not planning, on some level of what planning is – you are – in fact – planning.”
Then add a comment he’d made earlier: 





Ixarku said:


> Outlining and plotting are, for all intents and purposes, interchangeable concepts. In both instances at the most fundamental level, they are tools for planning a story. It's the presumption that 'planning is a waste of time' or that 'you can't plan because you can't know what your characters will do until you get there' that I have an issue with. These are flawed statements because there are countless exceptions that prove otherwise.
> 
> But, again, as always, do what you want, do what works for you, and don't worry about the opinions of others.


 
In that instance, it is more subtle and takes a political approach which makes it harder to confront but no less in the faces of those who have opposing views. The comments had only mentioned planning as a waste of time from a pantsers perspective, not the writing community or any other form of writer. Only that for a Seat of the Pants Writer - planning is a waste of time. And that is true for countless pants writers. Perhaps not all, but certainly for me, and apparently for Sam and Shadow too.

Those quotes were points where I was equally intent on giving a 'bad reply' ... instead, I took a deep breath and a different approach. Had certain people not already addressed those comments, there is a high chance I would be one of the people you are talking about now regarding harsh comments. I only held my tongue(metaphorically speaking) because my opinion had already been stated by others. 

I mean seriously… if you (generic or ixarku in scenario’s example) don’t intend on saying: “You think you’re not planning, but you are.” then what was the intended message, because I clearly failed to understand it.

For this reason, I am definitely stood in backing of Sam and Shadow – because my view and opinion is the same.

That is not to say I am against what you said either though. I understand your point of view so it is not my intent to openly argue against your opinion - only to give you _*my*_ perspective on the comments you have been speaking about.

 I largely agree with Kyle…  about 99% of what he said (some debatable examples in the building analogy but using lego instead of actual buildings I was able to see his view I think) and much of what you said has had political tact, fairness and a compassionate view.  So it’s hard (for me) to fault your comments – "_except_" in my opinion (which conflicts with yours) all comments were warranted (even if some people may view those same comments as excessive).


That's my opinion out there.


~Kev.

-Edit:-- (P.S)
Responses that could be read as 'Flaming responses' may have been 'in  your face rude' ... but if someone is going to be rude to me, I would  prefer it direct than subtle hints that make you question the true  intent behind their words. That is a far worse form of rudeness in my  opinion. That's how I felt with some of the subtle replies aimed at  pantsers.

So whilst comments openly rude can be easily quoted - other comments that I found to be rude were far more subtle to the point of being labeled "misinterpreted" ... sometimes though with claims of misinterpreted I have to wonder: "I know he shot them, he knows he shot them, the jury knows he shot them.. but there is no evidence to prove he shot them. How will they rule?"

I guess that's a good thing about being on a writing forum. We can use the tools at our disposal (words) to clear up misunderstandings or else avoid them entirely (ideally)


----------



## W.Goepner

shadowwalker said:


> I call that the "I Always Win Logic"...



Yes, that drives me nuts also. Especially when doing games. Those who refuse to die. AARGH!

Really I get it. Just like, 





> Gavrushka; The only reason I'm a pantser is because I can't plot...


I cannot plot either. Believe me I have tried.

(I am opening a can of crap here and I do not care it is my opinion)

I come to realize it as this:

Outliners/Planners are, somewhat, possessive/obsessive. They must have the structure of the outline/plan to give them guidance. (I get that. I actually would like that in some instances of my writing.) They seem to be in such extreme, that to think of what anyone who is a compulsive/pantser, is such a person that follows a unknown structure even unknown to themselves. This restrictive thinking is also leading into the Autism spectrum. Autistic people need structure in their life. As there are varying degrees of Autism, there are also varying degrees on planning/outlining, thus structure. 

*Not to be saying there is anything abnormal about Plotting, planning, or outlining and those who do it. *UNTIL!* they become so caught up in the idea that, they insist everyone must in some way be also, thus so they do not seem freakish to them selves.* 

To those who feel that way, I don't! and I can safely say that those who pants here, do not either. There might be some who wish they could to some extent but I am quite sure they do not. How can I be sure they do not?* READ their words!!!* They are telling you so. 99.9999% of pantsers *DO NOT!* Plan. At least the ones that have responded in this tread.


----------



## Pluralized

What a perplexing thread.

I wish I could plot, but sadly I can't. So I pants.


----------



## Greimour

Hmmm.. Goepner, that generic summary of Outliners/Planners is a bit harsh. 

I don't feel Kyle has many of those traits you listed. I could be wrong, he could be an obsessive compulsive autistic with an OCD for structure and understanding... but that's not the impression he gives me.

Obviously I am narrowing your generic down to a single person, but I think it is unfair to generalize based on a few peoples comments within this thread.

Also, I think we pantsers are equally obsessive - but perhaps impulsive rather than compulsive. People with autism (though arguably the human species as a whole has some degree of autistic traits) tend to specialize in certain fields. I would feel then, that people who pants are likely to have higher levels of autism than planners. (not saying we specialize in writing and planners don't - read on before words are put in my mouth)... The ability to bash our heads on a single problem in our heads without needing external constructs to help our mapping and guidance - yet somehow we still reach the conclusion. 

Which sounds more like autism to you? :/

I do not think that many planners here feel freakish or anything in regards to planning. I think a couple might think we are freaks (naming no names) but I don't think they feel they are the freaks.

For those reasons, on that comment Goepner, I have to disagree <3

About pantsers not planning though ... +1 obviously ^_^


----------



## W.Goepner

kaufenpreis said:


> Pantser v Planner? Why not both? I’m not copping out here, just suggesting a third option that I like to use. I tend to start off with a fairly loose plan, you know, main characters, ideas for scenes, how to escalate etc etc, and then I write to the points that I’ve made, allowing the characters to tell me the story. Every couple of days I’ll take a look at where the stories going and try and plan ahead, but just a little, otherwise it can be an exercise in herding cats. I find it works for me, and maybe a variation on it will work for you too. Keep on keeping on Jodie, all the best.



Now in this way I too am a planner.





> otherwise it can be an exercise in herding cats.


 OH I Love it! YES! Without guarding my tangents I too chase the proverbial Cat. But as I said I guard not plan. 

I had someone tell me they love, "Game of Thrones" The way the stories describe scenes, action, etc. They only wish he would get back to the first character in book one. (sounds like tangent writing to me)

Tangent and Pantsing might be part and parcel to one another, I am not sure. Trying to maintain a structure is not plotting though. It is what I think is called Paying attention to story line or (eew this sucks I have to say it) plot. (there is a difference between storyline pot and plotting isn't there? Gag gag spit spit sputter)


----------



## W.Goepner

Greimour said:


> I am not sure where that stands on the scale personally. Seems to be near the pivotal point of why the discussion gets heated:
> 
> "Plan by thought. Taking notes is planning. Jotting in notepads whilst walking around is planning." Etc...
> 
> There is sometimes only subtle differences between the planner and the seat of the pants writer. But take two extremes into consideration and the middle ground is as out of reach as the Horizon. (Kyle and I, case and point.)
> 
> Kyle plans with meticulous precision.
> 
> I plan as far as sitting at my computer and deciding to write something down in story format (prose)
> 
> ...
> 
> I can take notes, and I do... an idea for a character on something I was writing a week ago... a scene that belongs to no story at all. I see those notes as nothing more than seat of my pants writing anyway. I didn't plan the scene, I imagined it and wrote it down. I don't then plan where that scene is going, I write where it goes as it happens, when it happens... instantly.
> 
> For example:
> 
> I don't write:
> 
> Opening Scene: Character arguing with parents over birthday present.
> Second Scene: Character angrily pacing bedroom and destroying objects within when his phone suddenly rings.
> Scene Three: Character meets up with friend after hanging up the phone and together they witness a murder.
> 
> ^ In such a scenario, I would have written down the argument scene as I watched it unfold in my head. I would have then continued the writing with him in his bedroom, etc...
> 
> So, jotting down an idea or a note is just so I still have it in my mind when I transfer that same information to the PC - else I forget.
> 
> I was once 14,000 words int a WIP when I suddenly imagined a scene that wouldn't happen for a very long time. The non-entity enemy that had yet to be named, realized or discovered could be the protagonists hero. It was clear someone was pulling the strings, but the MC didn't know who. He ruled everyone out one by one for various reasons.. but the very first person he ruled out (because it made absolutely zero sense for it to be him - even to me) turned out to be the bad guy  - for reasons incredibly obvious by time I reached the scene I had just imagined.
> 
> 14,000 words into the story I had that epiphany, but the story wouldn't reveal it for a further 40,000 words or so... does that count as planning? An idea that I had mid creation of a work in progress?
> I didn't detail any scene's between the 14,000words to the moment of realization, I just learned that the bad guy would be realized and I knew who that bad guy was... finally... no plan to get from A to B though.
> 
> Where are the lines drawn?
> 
> The biggest argument are:
> 
> *"Pantsers have to do a lot of rewrites"* = common opinion. But we have to do no more nor less than planners.
> *
> "Even if you don't think you're planning, you are."* = OK, then when you think you're planning, your actually not. If your logic works, so does mine. You are merely managing your ideas in a way that allows you easier recollection or prompt your creative senses into a working gear - where as we do not need to perform such tasks to recall the information stored in our brains or give our creative senses the necessary kick-start. To argue one way or the other on this plane of logic is redundant and can easily digress into a contest of method superiority.
> 
> *"Writing without a plan is impossible."* = That's as true as needing a fork to eat... or needing shoes to run... or needing a nose to breathe... or needing nails to scratch an itch... and I could go on with equally ridiculous comments. You could argue that it's easier if you have those things... but then that's down to interpretation and opinion too. Try eating soup with a fork, or running on sand with shoes, or breathing through your mouth, or reaching an itch in the dead center of your back when a perfectly good back scratcher is in reach (or even a freakin' pencil for many of us writers)
> 
> ***
> 
> Debates are good tools, that's why I like this thread. It is not only good for learning how other people act, think, feel and react.. but good for expanding your own mind and learning about opinions you never knew you yourself had. Such as I have learned things about myself and other members of this forum thanks to this debate - and that knowledge can and will probably be used in my writing at some stage. On a character or plot-line or in any other feasible manner in which that newly gained information may present itself.



OOh my antagonist! Nice one Greimour. I was wandering how to create them. Open a ridiculous thread, throw out a argument or two, and BINGO Antagonist. love it. That is one of my hardest things to build an antagonist that does not go soft.


----------



## W.Goepner

Greimour said:


> Hmmm.. Goepner, that generic summary of Outliners/Planners is a bit harsh.
> 
> I don't feel Kyle has many of those traits you listed. I could be wrong, he could be an obsessive compulsive autistic with an OCD for structure and understanding... but that's not the impression he gives me.
> 
> Obviously I am narrowing your generic down to a single person, but I think it is unfair to generalize based on a few peoples comments within this thread.
> 
> Also, I think we pantsers are equally obsessive - but perhaps impulsive rather than compulsive. People with autism (though arguably the human species as a whole has some degree of autistic traits) tend to specialize in certain fields. I would feel then, that people who pants are likely to have higher levels of autism than planners. (not saying we specialize in writing and planners don't - read on before words are put in my mouth)... The ability to bash our heads on a single problem in our heads without needing external constructs to help our mapping and guidance - yet somehow we still reach the conclusion.
> 
> Which sounds more like autism to you? :/
> 
> I do not think that many planners here feel freakish or anything in regards to planning. I think a couple might think we are freaks (naming no names) but I don't think they feel they are the freaks.
> 
> For those reasons, on that comment Goepner, I have to disagree <3
> 
> About pantsers not planning though ... +1 obviously ^_^



As you are very well to right. Yes I did Flame. Yes I can be quite single minded. And I regret the reprimand. Regret not refute. I did throw out some insults and referrals. To generalize as I did to those who do not fit into the category. As I said this was my opinion. And in taking it on as such I may have scorn the opinion of my pears against me. I hope I have not. 

As I stated, (I wish I could plan for some of my writings need it) <paraphrased. As it was, I too, read the comments you mentioned, Their stick-to-it-nest/persistence they displayed, bordered on my description. 

To the rest of the outlining/plotting community, if you do *not* feel that in some manner I was speaking of you. Then you are right. I just was too lazy to go back and pull up the quotes as Greimour had. 

If instructed I will humbly leave this forum. I might have to restrict myself from commenting in these threads as it stands.

Edit:

In rereading the third time I see your point. I have mislabeled the outliner/planner and shifted the blame onto ME! I am a failure to the pantsing community and should be banned. 

No but you are right I see the difference. Thank you for showing me my error in thought.


----------



## Greimour

Lol. You don't deserve to be banned.. haha...
or banned from this conversation...

Perhaps its case of being heated, a momentary flame or a genuine opinion - either way, it is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I just wanted to share my opinion in response. (That it differed to yours)

I still think you're a great guy :love_heart:


----------



## Sam

stormageddon said:


> And I'm sorry Sam, but it's utterly ridiculous to suggest that those who said that did so because they feel "insecure" due to the fact you can pants. Can you think of any reason why someone would feel that way? If not, it's likely that something has been poorly phrased or misunderstood somewhere along the way  Anyway, of course people disagree with each other all the time, it's part of the fun of life, but we could be calmer and less confrontational about it.



If you keep telling someone they aren't something they know themselves to be, you (generic) have a problem that goes beyond disbelief. You can't accept that they are what they are because it threatens who you are. Ipso facto, their _modus operandi _makes you insecure because you can't handle it. So when someone tries to convince me and other pantsers that we don't know what we're talking about and are actually planners, they have a problem handling the reality that we can do something they themselves are incapable of doing. Whatever way you wrap that up in a neat bow, it's still called insecurity.  

For the record, I'm not being confrontational. I am stating my case and standing by it with abandon.


----------



## W.Goepner

Greimour said:


> Lol. You don't deserve to be banned.. haha...
> or banned from this conversation...
> 
> Perhaps its case of being heated, a momentary flame or a genuine opinion - either way, it is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I just wanted to share my opinion in response. (That it differed to yours)
> 
> I still think you're a great guy :love_heart:



I must be bipolar. Really, I mean it. I agree with you in it is my and your opinion and I can see where I erred in my thinking. 

As far as being banned from anything I hope not. But. My god a pantser that wants to plan. I am a freak. 

 I will try to tone it down. I too let my emotions get riled at times and tend to react before realizing I have. (not that you do)


----------



## Kyle R

Greimour said:


> I don't write:
> 
> Opening Scene: Character arguing with parents over birthday present.
> Second Scene: Character angrily pacing bedroom and destroying objects within when his phone suddenly rings.
> Scene Three: Character meets up with friend after hanging up the phone and together they witness a murder.
> 
> ^ In such a scenario, I would have written down the argument scene as I watched it unfold in my head. I would have then continued the writing with him in his bedroom, etc...



I think this highlights one significant difference in the two contrasting methods, for me.

As a plotter, I like to outline each scene in advance. I generally complete a twenty-scene outline, which covers four acts (five scenes per act).

Part of the luxury I've found with this process is the ability to write scenes out of order. I can write scene 17 one day, scene 4 the next day, scene 12 the following day...

When you have your story outlined, writing out of order is doable. Part of the reason I'd want to do this is because I have certain scenes that "line up" in my story.

My opening scene and my closing scene, for example, are written as polar opposites of each other, showing the character's "before the story" and "after the story" state, so I usually write them one after the other.

A struggling waitress longingly watching a wedding take place across the street, while her boss berates her (*opening scene)* ---> Getting dressed for her own wedding to take place outside her brand-new restaurant (*closing scene*). (For example). 

I have other scenes that I like to match up through the story, in specific places, so I like the ability to both plot these out ahead of time, and the ability to write them back to back, so I can keep the elements I want to contrast fresh in my mind and consistent in execution.

With pantsing, achieving this would be difficult for me, if not impossible. 

It might sound overly anal (or even crazy), I know, but it's a method I've found works for me, so it's one I like to stick with. Probably a result of my excessive studying of screenwriting. It's inevitable, in a field where structure is so emphasized, that some of the arguments for plotting tend to stick.

This (again), isn't meant as a judgment on pantsers or the method of pantsing. This is just one of the reasons why I prefer plotting over pantsing, when it comes to my own writing. :encouragement:


----------



## Deleted member 49710

I consider myself a pantser and I write out of order all the time. I make up scenes in whatever order they come to me and then I plot retroactively to figure out the story. I dunno, I'm a pantser who plots or a plotter who pantses, I guess. Really couldn't give a rat's ass how anyone refers to my writing process. If writing an outline works for you, awesome. Doesn't do anything for me, so I don't bother.


----------



## stormageddon

"I'm not being confrontational. I am stating my case and standing by it with abandon."

Beautiful. I'm so using that line on my English teacher. That aside, I take issue with your prior statement firstly because of the things I've been rambling about for the last few posts, and secondly because I felt you were doing that very thing a while back - do you recall the reading expansively vs sparingly thing we had going a while back? I was being an immature little whatsit on the actual thread so won't count anything actually said within it, but the reason you started that thread was to prove myself and a few other young upstarts wrong in thinking we didn't need to read very often to write well - or so I took it at the time.

I'm bringing that up because it's a large part of the reason I'm arguing my point here - I don't think your intent in that situation was to tell us we were wrong and you knew better, but due to the ambiguity of the internet I took it that way at the time. I think a similar thing has happened here - we don't mean to keep ticking each other off, it's more the fault of the medium we're conversing through. In my opinion.

Shadowwalker, I doubt if there's a person on the planet that doesn't have that happen to them on a daily basis, there's no need to make that face at me  just today, I said to a not-friend "my friends are so awesome", to which the response was "I don't know what's worse, your obvious superiority complex or the fact that you'll never befriend anyone from the real world". I still have no idea what she was trying to say, since she was referring to my friends that I know in real life, who I very much deem part of the real world. Anyway, it is my opinion that certain people's words had too much read into them, and it is your freedom to disagree.

Same to you, Greimour, though you make a very good case. The reason I see his words as "in my opinion" statements is that, shortly before he posted, somebody posted a Bradbury quote that was a definite "pantsing is superior" statement, but it was clearly meant as an IMO despite leaving off the IMO - I was assuming Ixarku had followed on in the same style.But that could be a strange thing to naturally assume, so I suppose I can see why people did not see it as such. Thank you for pointing it out (or reminding me of it).

I think part of my confusion is failing to see the subtextual nasties towards pantsers, the result of my not seeing any reason to place said subtextual nasties. But...I am rambling, I fear. I shall summarize by saying I see your perspective much better now, though still can't change mine.

And yes, of course you may eat my brain, though I ask that you wait until I've carked it, rather than force me to an early grave...or at least wait for me to get my first few bestsellers out there 

Sorry for typos and weird phrasing, this is far too long for me to proofread v.v


----------



## W.Goepner

Storm,

I like that name. And not because of X-men. It has a strong, fierce, and almost out of control feeling to it. 

And every one else that is reading and acting on this subject.

I, meaning Me, this one person. Have ranted, rambled, and Flamed, Against many subjects throughout this forum let alone this thread. I more than likely have alienated everyone with the exception of Greimour, And I am fairly sure he is not far behind. 

I do not like bringing things from the past because they are excuses to me. I think the people here understand my meaning. I am who and what I am from my history. 

Shadowwalker; I was more the victom of those friends that told you "you like him you just do not realize it" throughout my schooling. Those click kids that grouped together and held their noses aloof, or the ones that tried the not so savory stuff and found pleasure in teasing and tormenting the quiet and shy guy. I might have been the nerd or tried to be, because I did not fit in with the "Heads" and definitely not the "Jocks" That struck such a bad chord in me I wanted to lash out madly, and did to some point. Maybe not your friends directly, but you might understand. *I bow to you and apologize.*

Sam; I threw a tantrum at you for the 'just write' thread. I went back to my days in the Army and being told to just follow orders. Always the last one given no matter who or what the last one was given by or for. As far as I can tell you are not one of those who found it funny to pull me five different directions and tell me they would extract disciplinary action if I failed. Yet I took you to be one of them. *I salute you even though you might not be an officer.*

Kyle; Structure is nice, it formulates a plan of action. With structure you can build a great many things to include stories. I, though raised within a structured life, have none. I was never good enough to the one person that mattered in my life. Well maybe not me but everything I did. Drawing, "It is alright, but it is not good enough, it is not as good as your brothers." to my brother "Hey fantastic you brought home an 'A'." to me "Another 'a' not good enough." The project of rebuilding my minibike engine. "Here use these. If you cannot get it done with them you do not need to do it at all." A twelve inch crescent-wrench and a too large flat bladed screwdriver. *You are a better person than I, for you can do something I cannot.*

My heritage is a background of thinkers and overachievers, actually over thinkers. I am First generation American on my father's side, and second on my mother's. My father is full blood German, My mother is half German and half Portuguese. I tend to over think all together. I structure and plan most everything else in my life except two things. One; I am a clutter-bug. I do not clean up until it is in my way. Two; My writing. To writing I would love to bring order, so I did not feel as if I am struggling. As with most pantser style writers, I cannot wrap my mind around an outline to save my life. Hey, I might be wrong, and I am the only one that has this issue. As to being a clutter-bug I doubt I will ever change before I die. After all I will be fifty four May thirtieth.

Therefore I ask everyone to try to bypass my shortcomings and try to see the struggling person inside. I do not expect any of this to change how you see me. I just needed to let it out. If you take the time to read my stuff you will most likely see this person. I write with the emotions of love, peace, and caring. The three things I crave. I find it difficult to write the antagonist because I despise them and cannot think like that.

Well now you know more about me. love me hate me. Please do not despise me.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Goepner...You have yet to alienate me as well.

Look guys and gals, I never really expected this kind of response (8 pages!!!) to my opening post. I knew there would be some discussion, of course, because I have seen it before in other threads.

I also knew that there would be those who were hard pressed to accept what we pantsers know to be true. 

Here is the extent of the "plan" I had in mind when I started writing my WIP. 

Opening dialogue with "inner voice". 500 words worth. 

Last line of the book "Because I would kill for a cheeseburger."

Everything, and I mean every single word of the rest of it...79,500 words worth, have all come from just sitting down at the computer and writing. My antagonist didn't reveal his identity for a very long time. I knew there was one, but I didn't know who he was or what he could do. I had no idea of his character or motivations. Nothing.

I know that kind of thing would be hard to imagine had I not been the one actually _doing_ it. So I can definitely relate to those who have a rough time thinking that it's possible to write the way we pantsers do.

As I said before..Sam...thank you for moving the discussion from another thread into this one so that people could discuss the differences. 

I know some people have gotten heated. I also know that both sides, especially Kyle and Grem, have made very some very valid points.

I don't think anyone has really intended any insult. But, words can be construed as such, no matter the intent, when voices cannot be heard in real life.

The great thing about this thread, to me, is that I am able to sit back and observe. It's my normal M.O. in a group kind of setting. Characters for stories can come from anywhere. ;-)


----------



## W.Goepner

Well I guess that is two.  I feel better now.


----------



## Sam

stormageddon said:


> I take issue with your prior statement firstly because of the things I've been rambling about for the last few posts, and secondly because I felt you were doing that very thing a while back - do you recall the reading expansively vs sparingly thing we had going a while back? I was being an immature little whatsit on the actual thread so won't count anything actually said within it, but the reason you started that thread was to prove myself and a few other young upstarts wrong in thinking we didn't need to read very often to write well - or so I took it at the time.
> 
> I'm bringing that up because it's a large part of the reason I'm arguing my point here - I don't think your intent in that situation was to tell us we were wrong and you knew better, but due to the ambiguity of the internet I took it that way at the time. I think a similar thing has happened here - we don't mean to keep ticking each other off, it's more the fault of the medium we're conversing through. In my opinion.



Let me see if I understand what you're saying. Your fundamental reason for posting in this thread is because of something I said in another one? If that is the case, there's something you should know about me: I say what I feel needs to be said and make no apologies for it. That's how I operate. It is not meant as an affront to you or anyone else on the site. I am nothing more than a brutally honest person. I hold no grudges against anyone on WF. If you (generic) say something I feel is untrue or constitutes bad advice, I will call you on it. I will expect you to defend your standpoint, as I would expect to defend my own. If you make throwaway statements without offering viable proof for them, expect me to have something to say about it. You (Stormageddon) maintained a writer didn't need to read widely to improve their skills. I told you nine out of ten writers would beg to disagree, as evidenced by the replies in that thread. What you do with that advice is entirely your prerogative, but don't expect me to agree with you when all evidence speaks to the contrary. 

In this thread, at least two people have tried to insinuate that pantsing is in fact a form of plotting and that no one can possibly write something without planning it first. That standpoint is borne out by no evidence whatsoever. There are a multitude of writers who pen stories without any form of plan. Arguing that something is impossible because you can't fathom it is called the argument from (personal) incredulity, i.e. "I can't imagine this could be true; therefore, it must be false". That is exactly why that statement has met with such criticism.


----------



## Elvenswordsman

*cough* berating an admin is never a good idea *cough*

So... it can happen anyhow? There's no rule to it.


----------



## Sam

Elvenswordsman said:


> *cough* berating an admin is never a good idea *cough*



He wasn't berating me.



> So... it can happen anyhow? There's no rule to it.



From The Rules: 

*"Staff are members* who have volunteered time and energy to make  and keep the forum helpful and welcoming for everyone. The Owner takes  attacks on any volunteer member very seriously, and regardless of the  attacker's standing or reputation within the forum or elsewhere, the  consequences of any inflammatory, defamatory, bullying, or sniping  attack against a forum volunteer staff member range from temporary to  permanent bans".


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Sam said:


> Arguing that something is impossible because you can't fathom it is called the argument from (personal) incredulity, i.e. "I can't imagine this could be true; therefore, it must be false". That is exactly why that statement has met with such criticism.



Funny. Pople who believe in ghosts or UFO's or *insert your preferred supernatural/paranormal phenomena here* get that same kind of argument.


----------



## Gavrushka

T.S.Bowman said:


> Funny. Pople who believe in ghosts or UFO's or *insert your preferred supernatural/paranormal phenomena here* get that same kind of argument.



Damn, this could get all recursive if a pantser tries to spontaneously relate his experience of a supernatural encounter... 

And I'm convinced; I'll never pants again for fear of being dismissed as an unexplained phenomenon, and ending up as an exhibit in the Museum of Unnatural History.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Gavrushka said:


> Damn, this could get all recursive if a pantser tries to spontaneously relate his experience of a supernatural encounter...



I think that would bring all new meanings to "Ghost in the Machine." 



> And I'm convinced; I'll never pants again for fear of being dismissed as an unexplained phenomenon, and ending up as an exhibit in the Museum of Unnatural History.



Say it isn't so, Gav!!! We "unnaturals" MUST stick together. After all...the "planners" are out there _"plotting" _and stuff! *shudders*


----------



## stormageddon

Sam, I had issues with the manner in which the issue was being discussed, but I do not like confrontation. The thing that made me post in spite of that was remembering how I had originally taken what you'd said in a similar way. And yes, I saw soon after I took a step back from that discussion that that was all you were doing. I think that is an admirable trait to have, so long as when you (general) call people on it, you do it with tact.

Also, I don't expect people to agree with me on here, as I'm fairly certain that I am mildly deranged (I'm also fairly certain that I can write well on occasion, if only by fluke, and I hardly ever read). Like you, all I hope for is an acceptance of differences in opinion, and that said opinions are valid at the least to the individual who holds them.

If at any point I've sounded like I'm berating you or anyone else, I humbly apologize. I have not been taking as great care with my words as I might have.

Also, Goepner, you have such a strange and sweet way of arguing your case that I don't think it's possible for you to offend anyone  but I have to ask, do jocks really exist? I thought they were made up for entertainment purposes...


----------



## T.S.Bowman

stormageddon said:


> ...but I have to ask, do jocks really exist? I thought they were made up for entertainment purposes...



They exist. They are especially prominent in schools such as the ones I went to, where the town (and by default the class size, my graduating class totaled about 100 people) is small. The "jocks" get different treatment than the other students. Even the "brains" are treated as slightly lower denizens of the gene pool. 

When the football/basketball/baseball/pick your sport coach is also the math/science/biology/whatever teacher, which was the case at the High School I attended, then it's even worse.


----------



## Kevin

> throwaway statements without offering viable proof for them


 these kind of statements are made all the time, by all sorts. My proof? I don't have to offer any proof. Accept it, don't accept it... whatever, there's no requirement to defend or back up your statements. It's not required.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Kevin said:


> these kind of statements are made all the time, by all sorts. My proof? I don't have to offer any proof. Accept it, don't accept it... whatever, there's no requirement to defend or back up your statements. It's not required.



True enough. There is definitely no requirement to to back up your (generic) statements. But, in common face to face encounters, there may still not be the "requirement" but there would be the expectation of you (generic) being able to do so.

Why is it that the internet manages to throw that expectation out the window and allow people to spout off with whatever misinformed dribble they can pop off the top of their head? Is it the fact that the internet is, for the most part, an anonymous medium?


----------



## stormageddon

Bowman, that's terrible. As if school isn't bad enough v.v fortunately in Britain, everyone is too fat to exercise, so it's impossible for us to have that problem - at least until rolling down hills can be classed a competitive sport.


----------



## Sam

Kevin said:


> these kind of statements are made all the time, by all sorts. My proof? I don't have to offer any proof. Accept it, don't accept it... whatever, there's no requirement to defend or back up your statements. It's not required.



When you make statements that are misleading, whether intentionally or otherwise, you do need to be able to defend them. The problem with the Internet in general is that bad advice abounds by the bucket-load. If you say that "all writers are loners", you better have something to back that up. If you say that "prologues are only used by amateurs", you better have some compelling evidence to convince people of that. In general, when you make definite statements that have no wiggle room either way, expect to earn the ire of people who know better. 

If I joined a car forum and said "all BMWs are a pile of crap", without offering any proof to back that up, what do you think the reaction would be?


----------



## T.S.Bowman

stormageddon said:


> Bowman, that's terrible. As if school isn't bad enough v.v fortunately in Britain, everyone is too fat to exercise, so it's impossible for us to have that problem - at least until rolling down hills can be classed a competitive sport.



Isn't it over in England where they roll a cheese wheel down a hill and the fellas go running/stumbling after it?? 

I may have the wrong European country. If so, my bad.


----------



## stormageddon

T.S.Bowman said:


> Isn't it over in England where they roll a cheese wheel down a hill and the fellas go running/stumbling after it??



Yup, it is  the only way to get an Englishman to run is to bribe him with food. It's a mindset that begins very early on in life, with the chocolate egg and spoon race on school sports days. Man, it's good to be British~


----------



## Kyle R

Sam said:


> He wasn't berating me.



*She

:encouragement:


----------



## Kevin

We're not talking cars here. You can easily site statistics. And even if we were, you still don't have to answer. Bmws are pieces of crap because they look like pieces of crap. How's that? I could say it's my opinion. But... I don't have to say it. It's not required. I don't have to explain that it's my opinion about how they look. Not about how they run. They're ugly. As far as the ire of people... that's their problem (another opinion). If they choose to take something as a slap in the face... they choose to do so. What's with the ire?  No one actually slapped them in the face. They simply stated an idea.


----------



## shadowwalker

JMO, but when one makes statements on an _advice/discussion_ forum, then yes, I do think one needs to be able to back them up. If not, then people could be making all kinds of erroneous assertions (like, publishers will make you pay back advances) and merely proclaim them to be fact. And then of what use would these kinds of forums be? People come to these forums to learn, so it requires us to a) make sure we speak based on actual facts, and b) challenge others to prove they are.


----------



## Kevin

JMO s are just that. Sometimes when we are discussing ideas facts can't be sited. My JMO is that this a discussion forum. I leave it up to the intelligence of the individual members to decide what is reasonable and what is not.


----------



## Sam

Kevin said:


> JMO s are just that. Sometimes when we are  discussing ideas facts can't be sited. My JMO is that this a discussion  forum. I leave it up to the intelligence of the individual members to  decide what is reasonable and what is not.



I believe the word you're looking for is 'cited'. 

Nevertheless, and as I've already said, if you make definite statements ("publishers will reject anyone who uses adverbs!") without offering any kind of discernible proof, you are misleading people. It's not an opinion. You're stating it as fact. That is my issue here. I'm not saying you can't have an opinion. What I'm saying is that if you're going to toss definites around, you better be able to back them up.


----------



## shadowwalker

Kevin said:


> JMO s are just that. Sometimes when we are discussing ideas facts can't be sited. My JMO is that this a discussion forum. I leave it up to the intelligence of the individual members to decide what is reasonable and what is not.



Intelligence means nothing if knowledge and/or experience is lacking. When opinions are stated as fact, they need to be challenged.


----------



## stormageddon

I'm revising economics right now, and think this could this come down to the difference between positive and normative statements.

"Positive statements are objective statements that can be tested, amended or rejected by referring to the available evidence."

"Normative statements are subjective statements rather than objective statements – i.e. they carry value judgments."

Sam, yours was positive, and Kevin's normative. So, whether or not evidence or citation can be given depends on what sort of definite statement one is making. And yes, I am just trying to justify foruming instead of working v.v

Shadowwalker (I always want to call you Shadowstrider),

"When opinions are stated as fact, they need to be challenged."

Yes, but perhaps after ensuring that they have intentionally been stated as fact, rather than accidentally (as in the case of forgetting IMOs, which happens rather often).


----------



## shadowwalker

stormageddon said:


> Shadowwalker (I always want to call you Shadowstrider),
> 
> "When opinions are stated as fact, they need to be challenged."
> 
> Yes, but perhaps after ensuring that they have intentionally been stated as fact, rather than accidentally (as in the case of forgetting IMOs, which happens rather often).



I don't think intentional or accidental has any bearing on it. Only the person making the comment knows which is which - the readers do not. If it's opinion stated as fact, it needs to be challenged.


----------



## W.Goepner

Sam said:


> When you make statements that are misleading, whether intentionally or otherwise, you do need to be able to defend them. The problem with the Internet in general is that bad advice abounds by the bucket-load. If you say that "all writers are loners", you better have something to back that up. If you say that "prologues are only used by amateurs", you better have some compelling evidence to convince people of that. In general, when you make definite statements that have no wiggle room either way, expect to earn the ire of people who know better.
> 
> If I joined a car forum and said "all BMWs are a pile of crap", without offering any proof to back that up, what do you think the reaction would be?



Wow you  would be an idiot! (Pun intended.) BMW not my favorite vehicle. But they can be classy. The drivers on the other hand. (I won't go there) Oh I will. Manny, (Not all) think the vehicle constitutes the right to be a maniac. (My opinion of course.)

Of course a statment made without the willingness to elaborate. Is a farce. The pantsers of the world/this forum, Have stated arguments and fact that they in fact do not plot/plan/outline in any form. The planners/plotters/outliners, (some or few in this case) insist that because "THEY" cannot figure it into their minds, then the pantser must be wrong or lying.

This is what I was getting from their statements. Though it did not bother me directly it did sting for it bother other people and that brought on my reactions/actions.


----------



## W.Goepner

shadowwalker said:


> I don't think intentional or accidental has any bearing on it. Only the person making the comment knows which is which - the readers do not. If it's opinion stated as fact, it needs to be challenged.



Amen, 

If a person does not state IMO whether intentional or not, is cause for someone to ask or demand a explanation.


----------



## W.Goepner

Sam said:


> I believe the word you're looking for is 'cited'.
> 
> Nevertheless, and as I've already said, if you make definite statements *("publishers will reject anyone who uses adverbs!")* without offering any kind of discernible proof, you are misleading people. It's not an opinion. You're stating it as fact. That is my issue here. I'm not saying you can't have an opinion. What I'm saying is that if you're going to toss definites around, you better be able to back them up.



OMG! I have had that pulled on me and read it in other threads. I am sorry but I read adverbs in many of the books I buy. 

Yes I agree Sam, It would have been nice to have that statement backed with proof of publishers and examples of the rejected writing. It would be interesting to see the answers and works. To decide if it were a case of singularity.


----------



## stormageddon

W.Goepner said:


> Amen,
> 
> If a person does not state IMO whether intentional or not, is cause for someone to ask or demand a explanation.



I think I'm getting my words muddled again, because you've said what I meant to say v.v


The implied comment that sparked all this was something along the lines of "pantsers may think they're not planning, but they are", correct?


All I'm saying is that rather than responding with "you said this", one might respond with "did you mean to say this", because I really don't think many people subscribe to that belief, and so, though it may simply be misguided faith in humanity, I felt it was miscommunication rather than anything unpleasant. BUT we've already been down that path, so let's not go there again 


Also, was I one of the ones that sounded like I was arguing for pantsers not really pantsing? If so, it was very much an accident, and sorry.


----------



## W.Goepner

stormageddon said:


> Sam, I had issues with the manner in which the issue was being discussed, but I do not like confrontation. The thing that made me post in spite of that was remembering how I had originally taken what you'd said in a similar way. And yes, I saw soon after I took a step back from that discussion that that was all you were doing. I think that is an admirable trait to have, so long as when you (general) call people on it, you do it with tact.
> 
> Also, I don't expect people to agree with me on here, as I'm fairly certain that I am mildly deranged (I'm also fairly certain that I can write well on occasion, if only by fluke, and I hardly ever read). Like you, all I hope for is an acceptance of differences in opinion, and that said opinions are valid at the least to the individual who holds them.
> 
> If at any point I've sounded like I'm berating you or anyone else, I humbly apologize. I have not been taking as great care with my words as I might have.
> 
> Also, Goepner, you have such a strange and sweet way of arguing your case that I don't think it's possible for you to offend anyone  but I have to ask, do jocks really exist? I thought they were made up for entertainment purposes...



Pulled right from the Wikipedia.

Jock: The term *jock* in Canada and the United States refers to the classic stereotype of a male athlete. It is generally attributed mostly to high school and college athletics participants who form a distinct youth subculture. In sociology, the jock is thought to be included within the socialite subculture, which also contains the preps and Ivy-leagures. As a blanket term, _jock_ can be considered synonymous with _athlete_. 

I many cases it was rather daunting to have to be beside these kids, for I was the not quite plump yet smart kid.


----------



## Kevin

Here's an opinion:




> Pantser; plotter? What’s the difference? All your writing is nothing more than a partial regurgitation of all the letters, words and stories you’ve ever been exposed to? And all your stories are just bits and pieces, reassembled. They follow a pattern, a predictable sequence; just a matter of what ‘option’ your brain happened to choose for each action, whether you thought of it way ahead of time, or let it flow as you wrote it.




There's no facts that will back this up. It's a definite opinion. Could be subject to change, but for now lets say it's definite. How can it be backed up? It can't. How can it be denied? It can't, not with facts.

@ sam- cited: yes thx.


----------



## shadowwalker

Kevin said:


> There's no facts that will back this up. It's a definite opinion. Could be subject to change, but for now lets say it's definite. How can it be backed up? It can't. How can it be denied? It can't, not with facts.



When someone expresses an opinion, and it's obvious it's an opinion, there's no reason to demand anything. People might ask how someone came to form that opinion, but there's no demand to back it up. Not by a reasonable person, that is. But that's _very different_ from expressing an opinion in a manner which assumes it is fact, which makes it appear to be fact, which dismisses other opinions and/or actual facts.


----------



## W.Goepner

Kevin said:


> Here's an opinion:
> 
> There's no facts that will back this up. It's a definite opinion. Could be subject to change, but for now lets say it's definite. How can it be backed up? It can't. How can it be denied? It can't, not with facts.
> 
> @ sam- cited: yes thx.



You know this happens to be true.

Some where in history a famous person once said. "There is nothing in the world today that has not been done already." Every note of music, every word, every emotion, has been played, written, or displayed. When I think of music and hum or twitter a song, one that I would like to call my own, I hear the notes, melodies, stanzas, and measures of every piece of music I have ever heard. Because of the order I imagine them in it becomes my song.

One of my English teachers said once. (Mrs. Bernet.) "A book belongs to the author, A poem belongs to the author, Until it is read. Then it becomes the readers." How is this? What makes the book or poem the sole property of the Author until it is read. The thought and emotions of the reader. The writer/author might intend a subtle emotion in a point or stanza, The reader will put what they have carried through the previous paragraphs or stanzas, and put their own emotions there.

The same goes here. The word is seen not heard, the thoughts and emotions we read to them are our own. Essentially we tend to be riled by our own emotions and thought of what the other person is "typing." Giving to the words unintended meaning. Grating and grinding against our own self. We might as well be arguing with the person in the mirror.


----------



## Kyle R

W.Goepner said:


> The word is seen not heard, the thoughts and emotions we read to them are our own. Essentially we tend to be riled by our own emotions and thought of what the other person is "typing." Giving to the words unintended meaning. Grating and grinding against our own self. We might as well be arguing with the person in the mirror.



Very _zen_, and much in the same vein of Kevin's earlier comment (about having the power to decide whether or not the words of others offend you). 

Nobody can offend, insult, or upset you—unless you decide to let them. :encouragement:


----------



## Clove

Whether or not the question has come up before on this thread, I think it's a much more interesting point that though a writer may not actively 'plan' (in the physical sense of writing an outline, character sheets etc.) to what extent is a plan already in place which they might or might not have been the architect of. I'm thinking more broadly of Todorov and genres: if you are writing a realistic, historical romance, then there is that conventional framework in place already to begin with which stops you from placing dragons and aliens within it. You may not have _specific_ details yet, but there are greater limitations at work which govern eventually both the big and smaller picture. 

My personal opinion is that pure un-planned writing is within the same realm as those occupied by: hypergraphia, asemic writing, psychography, stream-of-consciousness writing i.e. anything which can involve a placement of words without conscious thought or meditation. I'm taking this whole thing through a very philosophical point of view, which is probably not very helpful, but what can I say, it's what I enjoy most.


----------



## W.Goepner

KyleColorado said:


> Very _zen_, and much in the same vein of Kevin's earlier comment (about having the power to decide whether or not the words of others offend you).
> 
> Nobody can offend, insult, or upset you—unless you decide to let them. :encouragement:



Yes, it is usualy the response of one or another that tends to rile me. Though I am more than likely reading my own emotion into what they type. I am usually correct in my assumptions when they next respond. Most people are correct when they put a thought or emotion into what they read. It is a choice to act upon them or to give them greater volatility, A choice not a reason.

I have to say I can see the points made on both sides of the spectrum and both had valid concepts, both have their unbending respects or point of views. Some times it is better to concede differences and let one show their ignorance while keeping quiet about it, Than to argue and let others not see the difference between the two.

A debatable, yet true statement. "Who is the bigger fool, the fool themselves or the one that argues with them?" (metaphor, no one here is a fool) When you (general) rise to the bait of another you bring yourself down to their level.

I cannot help but wander was this their intention to begin with.


----------

