Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/44001
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

In my experience, it depends on what the story needs. I've written stories that had to be plotted beforehand because of what the point of the story was. I've written stories that had to be half-plotted because the in-universe timescale they gradually explore couldn't help but write itself at the level of minutiae, once I knew the large-scale trajectory. I've written stories I only thought I could discover, but at least the terrible first draft helps one plot the second. I've written stories that brought together, in a plotted way, the work of multiple earlier stories wiser origins varied in writing method. I've written stories that felt like they wouldn't involve discovery writing, until I got into them far enough to know the original plan was a little off.

That doesn't sound like actionable advice, does it?

I think what's universally needed is to write in a way that makes the first draft exist. Words need to flow from your fingers; your inner critic can always come back to it later. Pick whichever kind of writing you think will work best, then see if the words form. Not if they're good, in your view or anyone else's; if you're asking that, you should have a first draft finished first. If you get stuck, try to deviate from your original preference for writing strategy. If you had an outline, see where your characters take you when you ignore it; if you didn't, try to use one. You may find you change strategy several times as you're going through. That's OK; the first draft, or even the finished story, can have sections that came about in different ways.

When you've finished the first draft, read through it to see what you learned about discover vs don't from it. The lessons may be applicable broadly, or just to this story; either's good. When you have a final version, you might learn even more from that one.

Original score: 0