Writing Blog Number 2

20240120 Plotting and Pantsing

Plotting and Planning

There are three ways to go about writing something. First is the Pantser model, where you just write. Second is the Plotter model, where you make meticulous plans of every aspect of your story. Third is the Plotser or Plantser model, where you have a vague outline and use that.

Before I go on, I need to say – none are better than any other. It is whatever works for you. And you might even find that you need to do all of them depending on what you write.


1. Pantser

This is me!

Basically, 90 percent of what I write I write from the seat of my pants. I have my “what if…?” question, a character or two, and then I go for it. I might not even have the bad guy (antagonist) when I start. An ending might not even come to me until the very end when I reach it, and it’s what feels right or natural.

This works best if you are a fast writer, like me, because you can remember the details you have put into the story and don’t have to look back through notes or whatever to make sure it stays on track. The positives are that you are free to take your story where it wants to go, and are not mentally tied down to a set plan of attack. Further, whatever genre you like reading, if you write in that genre as well, you already know how the stories go, know the tropes, know the expectations, so you have an idea of what a story like that should contain before you even begin.

The negatives are that you can lose your way, you can meander, you can take the story in directions that make no sense when you read back over them, even though they felt good at the time. You are also open, unfortunately, to external stimuli. This means you are more likely to be influenced by something else you are reading or see on TV or the like. It could turn your work into bad fan fiction, a pastiche of something else, or become a direct copy without you realising it until too late.

But, for me, I just write. I do not sit down and think, I am going to write a 95k word horror novel right now! I have a simple idea and I write that idea until the idea has run its course. It might be 1000 words or 100,000 words. It doesn't matter. The story and the idea tell me how far they go. I don't plan, I don't do character studies, I just write.


2. Plotter

In my opinion, you cannot write a non-fiction book without plotting. A memoir, sure, because you lived it, it’s in your head. But, for example, my book on Australian history took me 6 months of research, planning and getting everything in a decent order before I even began to fill in the gaps. This from some-one who can write a novel in a month!

When it comes to fiction, though, I have also plotted some things. Particularly fantasy books where I have a map of a world that I have created for just that book. I also worked in a story that took me two years, and was meticulously plotted out. The reason is some of the themes are hard to write about for me and I can’t just live in that world for too long.

So, that’s me.

Plotting gives a story a skeleton before putting meat on the bones. All the beats are there. The twists, the turns, everything, and the writer knows when to do reveals for maximum impact. Especially when there are a lot of characters and they do not do things together, plotting makes life for the writer easier, and stops mistakes being made. It means a story can be put away for a while when the writer works on other things, and then the return to that work is simple. The writer does not have to read back through everything and try to remember where they were headed.

The main negative is that it sets the writer in a mindset that the story has to go a certain way. Some plotters can change their plan part-way through the work, but many cannot. They feel that they have everything so carefully worked out that changing one thing will result in an avalanche of changes later – the butterfly effect in writing. So they stick to the plan even if it does not work.

But plotting is not just the story beats – it also involves the characters. Serious plotters will have all the main characters and secondary characters well thought out, with back-stories, descriptions, everything worked out, and this informs the story. This means the characters are easier to keep separate and they don’t become ciphers of one another. However, if a character’s personality does not fit the story as it goes ahead, once again a plotter is stuck in everything they have created for themselves. Again, experienced writers know how to change their plans, but many feel they cannot.

(As a side tangent, a common mistake a number of plotters fall into, especially early on in their career, is the need to include every single detail of back-story they have created in the final work. This is not needed, and so long as it exists somewhere, it will inform the work.)

Plotting also means if you are stuck in a scene or at a point, you can go to a different part of the story and write from there, knowing perfectly where it fits in with the overall story, and come back later to the sticking point. That is a huge advantage and really helps keep writer’s block at bay.

Plotting is a great way to make sure the story you want to tell makes sense, has a good three-act structure, has decent characters, and everything ties together and makes sense. It allows for time to take care with the story-writing craft. And it can really give peace of mind to a writer as to where they are headed.

One last thing – if your planning involves use of a self-generated map, then put that map into your book or work. If it helps you, it will help a reader, and readers (especially of fantasy) love maps.


3. Plotser or Plantser

These strange terms relate to a person who is a mix of the two extremes, and I think most writers would fall somewhere along this part of the spectrum. Yes, there are no definites. People tend not to be exclusively one or the other (tend to… I have met a small number who are pure plotters and some who are pure pantsers), and so they would fall here.

These writers might do a very minimal skeletal outline with huge gaps to be filled in. They might not have an ending. They might only have a beginning and an ending. They might only flesh out one or two main characters and let the rest grow organically. The map they use might only have a few things marked on it.

Like I said, it is very common to fall somewhere here. You might be mostly a pantser, but you know where the story is going to go. Or you might be a complete plotter, but you leave some aspects of your characters open to fit into what happens over the course of the story.

As I said, none of these are right or wrong. What works for you is what you should do. And what works for one project may not work for another. You might start life as a die-hard plotter, but after a few years you discover you’ve become a complete middle of the road plotser/plantser. Everyone’s journey is different.

I will finish here by saying the majority of writing courses I have done (and this includes my university degree – Bachelor of Arts (Creative Writing)) have said that you need to be a plotter and this is the only “proper” way to write. I disagree 100%. Write the way that works for you.


4. Chekhov’s Gun

This is an odd thing to put here, at the end of this, but I think this is the best place to put it.

In its simplest terms, Chekhov’s gun is a rule for writers that says if you introduce a gun in act one, it had better be used before the end of act three.

Okay, you can include things to add colour, but they need to help with a description. Describing a girl as having “hair like a hippy from the 1960s” when the story is set now tells us a little bit about her. You can, of course, describe things. A description of a house will show a reader that this place is a part of normal suburbia. They all have relevance.

However, it is the details that are not normal that fill in the Chekhov’s gun component. You describe John Smith as having a long coat that he wears all the time. Great. That is not normal. Does it come out later? Is it the way the main character recognises John’s body when he is found dead, his face ripped off? Or does it tell the main character John is the man who saved the children from the burning orphanage and ran away before anyone could recognise him? Or does it get in the way and make him trip when he runs from the suburban lion? Great. But if he wears it and it’s mentioned in one scene as something odd, then never makes another appearance, it should not have been there.

This is something that plotting can help you overcome. In fiction, we have been conditioned to expect that these things matter. You will leave your reader unfulfilled (and so less likely to read something else of yours) and even a little bit of plotting (or judicious editing) can eliminate this.

For what it’s worth, this rule is even more important when writing for middle grades or children, especially picture books. Children will want to know everything and why it’s there, and a lack of answers will turn them off.

The reason I bring it up is that this is something many writers at the start of their journey get wrong. Of course, if you think John Smith’s out of place long coat in one scene that is never explained or brought up again is cool, then keep it. I am just saying that remembering Chekhov’s gun will help keep your readers satisfied.