Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/29199
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

The main problem with trying to estimate something like this is that, even if two writers used the same very detailed plot summary to write a novel, they might produce works that aren't close to being the same length, because of the way they write.

Some authors are much more "concise" than others; for example, Voltaire's _Candide_ has been described as a 1,000-page epic condensed into 75 pages, while Tolkien's work often rambled with details that weren't even relevant to the full plot (e.g. Bombadil). Admittedly that last example may not sound like it makes much difference, but there's a more relevant observation re: LOTR. If you work out how many words motivated each hour of film adaptation, they were condensed even more than most novels. (Much could be cut, e.g. in the first film characters step into a tunnel and are seen emerging from it a few seconds later, and quite a bit happens therein in the novel!)

Even the structure of a novel can influence how concise it is; for example, if the same events are told from multiple perspectives the word count will probably climb (see e.g. George R R Martin), whereas if characters are writing to each other with descriptions of what happened to them (see e.g. _The Color Purple_) the word count can fall.

The only thing I can recommend is bullet-pointing the plot in detail, with nested bullets so you can be confident of the relative weight of different chapters. If you then write one of them, you'll have a rough basis for extrapolation. But even chapter by chapter a novel can vary in how quickly it tells its story, so this will only be a rough estimate.

Original score: 19