Post History

I've never subscribed to this notion that you should just start writing. Sure, depending on your level of skill and experience, some number of things about your first draft will probably be bad. A novel is an incredibly complex piece of art with severe constraints on its form. It is hard to get everything right in one go. 

But at the same time, I think there ought to be one thing good about the first draft. Maybe some of the characters are flat, but at least one should show some definite shape. Maybe not all the motivations are clear, but at least one should be. 

A story starts with an idea, some juxtaposition of forces or desires that occurs because some particular character finds themselves in some particular situation. That may not be all fleshed out when you start writing, but at least the basic lines of the character or the situation should be there, otherwise, you are not writing a story, you are just writing stuff. 

Editing a story will turn it into a better, more complete, more exciting, more engrossing, more convincing story. Editing just stuff will not turn it into a story, except by accident. 

My advice would be, don't start writing until you have a story. It may not take much to create the seeds of a story, but you'll know if you have one, because if you have one, something, at least, maybe just one small thing, will not suck about the first draft. 

And it is okay not to have a story. Lots of great writers had long gaps between books, either waiting for a story to come to them or going out and searching for one. But however hard or easy they come, whether they come and lay down at your door or you have to go out into the wilds to hunt one down, wait till you have a story, the germ of a story at least, before you start writing. 

Otherwise you will just frustrate and disappoint yourself and spend your effort in the wrong place. We write stories. Until you have a story, it is too soon to start writing.