{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "canonicalUrl": "https://serpentsquiggles.neocities.org//posts/essays/embarrassed-drafts",
  "description": "|",
  "path": "/posts/essays/embarrassed-drafts",
  "publishedAt": "2022-08-03T00:00:00.000Z",
  "site": "at://did:plc:ivoe7cntxuy6at7uzmxzs2ft/site.standard.publication/3mfk6cpprzt2t",
  "textContent": "I suppose that this is a reader response blog now.  As has happened not\nonce, but twice before,\nsomeone on discord asked me how to write and I spilled a bottle of ink\nexplaining.\n\nThis time, a friend asked:\n\n> help?  \n> how does one plot a story (or even start)\n\nNow, I have technically written on this topic\nbefore, so long time readers of this blog will find this familiar.\n\nStill, \"Ur-Development\", in addition to being a pretty bad essay by my\nnew standards, only articulated a theory --- not an explanation.  It\nwasn't a tutorial, and anyone sent to that post for guidance will come\naway with only a vague understanding of what to do next, if ideally a\nbit more general understanding (in practice, they'd probably just be\nconfused).\n\nSo that's what this follow up is for. Let's put that theory into\npractice.\n\nIntroduction\n\nIf you've read any amount of modern writing instruction, you could\nwrite this next paragraph yourself, but I feel compelled to add it, if\nonly as ritual.\n\nIn the rest of this article, I'm going to make several definite\nassertions about how best to write and what you want to be doing. I'll\nonly disclaim here: this is my process, not law, so pick out whatever\nsounds helpful to you.\n\nAnd for stuff that doesn't sound as helpful, it might not work for you\n--- but it still may well be worth trying anyway, just to gather data,\nsince what I do clearly can work, for some value of \"work\".\n\nWith that out of the way, I think the first thing to keep in mind when\noutlining is that outlining is a form of storytelling. And for our\npurposes, a telling of a story can be three things: shortened,\nprecise, coherent --- pick two.\n\nTo be useful as an outline, though, it must be shortened. Thus,\neverything in your notes exists by virtue of existing either as\nunworkably vague summation, or as little acontextual fragments of\npotentially usable prose.\n\nCall these ideas and details. The first thing I'll tell you is that\nyou'll want to have a place to put both; they're both a part of the\nprocess.\n\nThe second thing to always keep in mind is you don't want to be\noutlining. Your goal here isn't to produce a finished outline --- I\nnever have. I finish writing arcs before I finish outlining them. The\nonly rule of writing is tell your story, and you only need enough\noutline to accomplish that. Or, to play mad libs with a quote:\n\n> The primary thing when you take a pen in your hands is your\n> intention to write the story, whatever the means. Whenever you\n> outline, brainstorm, summarize, throw away vomit drafts or pin\n> string to photos on a corkboard, you must write your story in the\n> same movement.\n>\n> Miyamoto\n> Musashi\n> (not really)\n\nPut more soberly, it's worth elaborating that outlining can solve\nthree problems, mainly:\n\n1.  \"But I have no idea what to write.\"\n2.  \"But I don't know if my ideas will hold up.\"\n3.  \"But I don't know what I'll need later.\"\n\nIn some ways these are expressions of the same problem, but to\nillustrate each, say you wanted to tell the story of a sad swordswoman\nwho goes to slay the ghost queen who haunts the moon.\n\nProblem type 1 is writing a few chapters then realizing:\n\n> okay, but how even does my wandering swordswoman get from wandering in\n> bumbledum nowhere to being anywhere near the moon ghost?\n\nProblem type 2 would be writing out the story, and then as you get\nnear the grand confrontation you realize:\n\n> wait, why does she even want to slay the moon queen?\n\nProblem type 3 is getting the scene where she ascends from the earth\nto the moon via a ritual teleportation circle and realizing:\n\n> fuck, it sure would be nice if i had ever mentioned ritual circles\n> existed anytime before now. without that, this is kinda cheap\n\nIn sum, you might outline:\n\n- So that you even have a story to tell.\n- So that your story doesn't fall apart as you're telling it.\n- So that your story is a bit more polished.\n\nAnd it's important to be aware of what problem you're specifically\ntrying solve when you outline.\n\nFor example, a problem of type 3 (what if I need setup later?) is a\nbit less important (or at least different in form) if you're writing\nfanfiction, where you have plenty of characters and worldbuilding and\nplot points to draw upon whenever you need, and the general space of\nwhat can be done is established.\n\nProblems of type 2 (what if plot holes?) aren't important if you're\nwriting a simple story where this problem is unlikely --- after all,\nit's much more likely a murder mystery falls apart than a slice of\nlife story.\n\nAnd problems of type 1 are less of an issue in episodic stories, or\nstories where the logistics of \"how do I even get from A to B\" aren't\nas daunting in scope due to genre or plot/setting. Contrast a\ncontinent-spanning fantasy adventure to a superhero story set in one\ncity.\n\nYou could be skeptical of this focus on specific problems, of saying\nessentially, it's okay to have no idea what you're writing if you\nthink you can get away with it. Some, I'm sure, accept the dichotomy\nbetween planners and \"pantsers\", architects and gardeners,\nnarrativists and\nsimulationists,\nor however many other ways you can express this genre of distinction.\n\nBut still, isn't it always better to do more planning, if you can?\nSure, some people lose motivation to work on their story if they plan\ntoo much, or feel they can't faithfully write their characters if they\nknow what's going to happen.\n\nBut, and forgive the rudeness, is this not a skill issue? Maybe some\npeople aren't cut out for planning, but this isn't an argument that\nplanning isn't strictly better.\n\nAs a certain writing youtuber\nasks: can gardeners do\nanything that architects can't? To quote from a comment I left on that\nvideo:\n\nFundamentally, the limitation on every outline is that the map is not\nthe territory. You can have detailed plan, but the story you're writing\ncan't be fully characterized by the plan, or that plan would be the\nstory (anything else you'd add is by definition unnecessary). \n\nThere must be details you haven't worked out, and those details, some\nof them, must be crucially important, or there's no need to go into\ndetail. There will be turning points, critical moments, where a single\ngesture from a character or the phrasing of a short line of dialogue\ncould shape scenes or entire arcs. (All for want of a nail, you've\nheard it before.)\n\nSo it's entirely possible that, after planning out the entire\nalphabet, you get into the weeds and find that the path from A to B or\nJ to K isn't as smooth as you'd want it to be.  Most of the time, it's\nwell within your abilities as a writer to course correct, tweak a few\nthings so that the path from there is at least as smooth as you could\nmake.\n\nHowever, if you had been gardening, would those weeds have been so\ntroubling? Without an outline, when just improvising, you can simply\ngo in the most natural seeming direction right away, rather than\nhaving to twist and contort paths so that they bend towards the\ndestination you already have in mind.\n\nIf the benefits of outlining is consistency and purpose, then the\nbenefits of improvised writing is flow, and that's what draws us\ninto a story and keeps us enthralled in the first place.  Outlines are\nglobal, but stories are read locally.  Ultimately, the thing outlines\nget you is avoiding the possibility that down the line, there's\nsomething you'll think of later that you wish you thought of earlier.\n\nAnd the thing not outlining gets you is kind of identical, isn't it?\nWhen you're in the guts of a scene, feeling your characters' minds\nvividly and able to clearly see the layout of the room in your mind,\nwhen the vibes are firing on all cylinders, you just might think of\nsomething that makes a lot more sense, that you'll wish you thought\nwhen you were planning this all out, but there's too much planning you\ncan't scrap now.\n\nYou might think this is an overall lesser concern --- after all, in\nthe worst case, if the thing you thought is so compelling, you can\njust change your outline, and that's certainly less work that having\nto rewrite the whole story because you improvised your way into a plot\nhole.\n\nBut I'm not sure it's so simple.  How much of what you've written\nuntil now has been invested in setting up things later in the outline?\nHow pointless will it be if you can't follow through on the promises\nyou were making, just because a better idea occurred to you?\n\nI'm not the biggest fan of just blithely going \"both sides are the\nsame, everything is perfectly balanced and nothing is better than\nanything else\", but I think it's entirely possible to outline your way\ninto plotholes, albeit of different type (and perhaps overall lesser\nin quantity and severity?) than the ones you might improvise your way\ninto.\n\nAnd you need to be aware of that. Don't outline because you think\nstories should be outlined, outline to solve problems. With every pen\nstroke, you must write your story.\n\nBut this is all preface, isn't it? You've scrolled one third down the\npage and I haven't even started talking about how to outline\n\n(Still, I think understanding the \"why\" solves much of the problem of\n\"how\".)\n\nSuffice it all to say, then, if you want to outline, your first step\nshould be to ask yourself:\n\n- Where is this story going? Can I imagine the broad strokes from\n  start to finish with no blank spots? Try writing this out; if you\n  only think inside your head, your brain can trick you into thinking\n  your ideas are clearer than they really are.\n- Does it make sense? Can I explain the reasons and justify the events\n  of this story with no glaring logical errors? Consider discussing\n  the trickier bits of plot with a friend, and seeing how another\n  perspective tries to solve the problem, or evaluates your solution.\n\nAnd you might be expecting a third question here, but there isn't\nreally a test for the last issue. Problems of type 3 are purely polish\nand foresight.^And, of course, [pacing.]\nMore setup is usually better, but it isn't always necessary, and if it\nis necessary, it means the",
  "title": "Outlines as Temporarily Embarrassed Drafts"
}