::sigh::

[ksmith]

Yet another example of sweeping advice that may or may not apply to you.

Speaking as someone who has rewritten every single one of her books, and has been told that the rewriting improved them immeasurably, do whatever works. Some people can write straight through with little if any editing, ghod bless 'em, and others labor over every other word and some of us fall somewhere in between and Spare Me the freaking generalizations as to what will work and what doesn't. If something works for you, fine. If it doesn't, find what works and go with that. But your process is your process, and like your skin tone or your tendency to get heartburn after eating chocolate or the little flutter in your innards when you see pics of Alan Rickman, it's inborn, perhaps inexplicable and possibly annoying, but it's the way your brain works and if you try to argue with brain, said brain, well, won't listen. So you can either beat it against the wall or work with it, and whatever works for you, work with it, and if it's writing straight through or outlining to death and beyond or throwing 15 pages a night at the wall to find the 5 that stick, it is what it is. If you don't know what it is, you will find it in time, possibly by trying the method decribed above, and either finding that it works or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, IT'S OK TO MOVE ON AND LOOK FOR SOMETHING ELSE. It doesn't mean you've failed. It doesn't mean you're lazy, dumb, or that you'll never succeed in this market.

And if there's one generalization that always seems to apply, it's that there's no generalization that applies to everyone. And writers who think there is make my teeth hurt from the clenching.

Comments

[jimhines.livejournal.com]

Sigh. You know, I'm really tired of, "This is how I do it. Follow in my footsteps, for mine is the One True Path."

If I followed his advice, I never would have sold a single book.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

And it just feeds into the "every one of my words is Golden, so don't dare ask me to change a thing" hole that some writers, unpubbed and occasionally pubbed, fall into.

Most folks do need to rewrite, at least in places, and that's about as general as I'll get.

You wouldn't want to read one of my first drafts. Well, maybe you would, but I wouldn't let you.

[davidlevine]

Although I agree with you, I think it's worth considering that a writer's own opinion of "what kind of writer they are" could be incorrect. If you are "one of those writers who never rewrites" or, conversely "one of those writers who always rewrites" you might benefit from trying the other way once. jaylake used to be a blow-through-it-in-one-draft writer but now he's all burbly about his New Model Process.

[pbray.livejournal.com]

It hurts when I see all the people who automatically bob their heads up and down whenever they see one of these bits of sweeping advice.

Hurts more when you've volunteered to critique manuscript pages for them, and when you point out an issue, you're told "NAME said I don't have to worry about pacing/dialogue/characterization/historical details/fill-in-your-own-blank."

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I personally would be arguing with the pattern set by five previous books. Process evolution is always possible, but again, it's because your writing brain accepts the change. My point is that you can't force-fit a process. Jay's process may have changed because it was ready to, not because he made the conscious decision. The tail wagged the dog, iow.

And I should take back the above, because I don't know enough about his process to comment--I confess I missed the New Model posts. I will say that I may see some changes in my "the plot laid out in my synopses never survives the actual writing" process since for the first time, editor commented on my wip synopsis. I rewrote accordingly, and both editor and agent feel the overall story promises to be stronger as a result. Will this save me from my usual stall-and-retrench-at-page-200 that I've lived through 5 times before? I would love to think so, because nothing so disheartens me as really, truly believing that I have a solid opening even as the backbrain gibbers that this was the same thing I thought the last time. And the time before that. And the time before...

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

As much as I enjoy Stephen King's fiction and his books about writing, he tends to fall into the "this works for me, and if it doesn't work for you, it's because you're lazy/an artiste/not trying/etc" camp. Which is even more annoying given the fact that his later books could've stood more editing.

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

I think the critical thing for NEW writers is, until you've gotten a novel-length work under your belt (written, not necessarily published) you don't know WHAT works for you.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

Well, that's one of the things you start to get a handle on while you're writing your half-million or so words of crap. At that point, advice may be all you have to go on, unless you're one of those very lucky ones who starts out of the gate with a very strong sense of process/voice/etc. But one of the things you need to learn is when to determine that certain advice isn't working for you, and to let it go. And you do learn it. If you don't, it's damned hard to move to the next stage.

[davidlevine]

Whether Jay's process changed because it was time for a change and he merely documented the process, or Jay's process changed because he decided to change it, I suspect that something prompted him to try something different.

Of course, if you have a process that works and makes you happy, why mess with it? (But if your process is driving you bats, maybe you should try something else.)

Personally, I've tried and tried to do the "barf out a quick first draft and then revise" thing and it just doesn't work for me, so I'm really talking through my hat here...

[elfs.livejournal.com]

What if you already have three novels written (and one selling okay) and your reaction to your ideas list is, "Oh, god, I don't want to write like that again?"

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

(But if your process is driving you bats, maybe you should try something else.)

In my case, my process drove me bats because I tried to fight it. It's going to be interesting to see how this iteration presents. Bound to be an adventure.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

To my mind, though, ideas aren't process so much as, well, something else.

Are you bored with your genre, or your characters, or something else? I know that there are certain thing I like to write--character, suspense, intrigue--that I can write within the boundaries of any of several genres or stretch into mainstream. As long as I can indulge my preferences, I can move away from what I don't like about a particular genre or story and try something else.

But it doesn't as though your problem is process-related, at least imo.

[janni.livejournal.com]

Is it only because I'm not one of those writers that the one-draft-and-don't-you-ever-look-back folks seem particularly dogmatic about the One True Way thing, and don't seem to intuitively get that there really are other fully functional ways?

(Or maybe it's having been in a writer's group once with these sorts of writers. I left around the time the word "unprofessional" got bandied around for my process, because it didn't involve an outline and a single draft.)

[pxcampbell.livejournal.com]

But he's featuring YOUR book on his blog page.... ;)

You're absolutely right. Everyone's process is different. It's nice that writers share their processes, though. For those who haven't found the one that works, it's a nice way of trying on alternatives.

My first drafts would be self-indulgent and boring. And I'm a haptic learner and a far better editor than writer, so I need to blow through a first draft to give me something to hold and work with.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

But he's featuring YOUR book on his blog page.... ;)

Ah, made me look...

Actually, that's the Eos blog page, and seeing as I'm an Eos author...

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I think perhaps it's an overall personality thing. People who do write that way are so focused that they simply don't understand that other people may construct a story differently.

For "focused", substitute "blindered," if so inclined.