Plot or Pants
This strikes me as one of those ‘lost in translation’ moments, at least as far as English is concerned. Pants, in particular, is problematic, referring to an entirely different layer of clothing, depending upon which side of the Atlantic you sit.
In the writing context, however, the intra-pants distinction is relatively academic, whereas the plot-pants dichotomy is a hot topic of debate. To cut to the chase, there are ‘plotters’ and ‘pantsers’ (honestly). The former methodically plan out their literary journey, the latter metaphorically fly by the seat of their pants. (And it really doesn’t matter which pants, even on a Zoom call with your editor.)
Reputedly in the plotter camp are J.K. Rowling, John Grisham and James Patterson. Famous pantsers include Mark Twain, Stephen King and Raymond Chandler.
One glance at this list tells you there can be no right answer. It would seem to be a matter of personal preference. I come down on the side of the fence where you must look out for the protruding nail.
To flesh out a skeleton plot strikes me as the literary equivalent of painting by numbers. And I really can’t imagine how you can possibly have all your best ideas in advance. It would be like going fishing with a list of what you were about to catch, or to the football knowing the score (though maybe I would take that one).
There must be merit, however, in the alternative method; certainly, less stress as the deadline approaches and the end is still not in sight. About this time of year I receive emails from Amazon suggesting I might like to pre-order the book with which I am simultaneously wrangling. No pressure!
On reflection, in practice there must be fifty shades of grey; a hybrid approach. It stands to reason that you can’t write a novel without some vague notion of the plot. And surely even the most pig-headed planners will change course for a humdinger of a brainwave.
Which brings me back to transatlantic semantics. While you can see where my loyalties lie, I ought to mention that ‘pants’ is also British slang for ‘rubbish’ or ‘hopeless’!
In the writing context, however, the intra-pants distinction is relatively academic, whereas the plot-pants dichotomy is a hot topic of debate. To cut to the chase, there are ‘plotters’ and ‘pantsers’ (honestly). The former methodically plan out their literary journey, the latter metaphorically fly by the seat of their pants. (And it really doesn’t matter which pants, even on a Zoom call with your editor.)
Reputedly in the plotter camp are J.K. Rowling, John Grisham and James Patterson. Famous pantsers include Mark Twain, Stephen King and Raymond Chandler.
One glance at this list tells you there can be no right answer. It would seem to be a matter of personal preference. I come down on the side of the fence where you must look out for the protruding nail.
To flesh out a skeleton plot strikes me as the literary equivalent of painting by numbers. And I really can’t imagine how you can possibly have all your best ideas in advance. It would be like going fishing with a list of what you were about to catch, or to the football knowing the score (though maybe I would take that one).
There must be merit, however, in the alternative method; certainly, less stress as the deadline approaches and the end is still not in sight. About this time of year I receive emails from Amazon suggesting I might like to pre-order the book with which I am simultaneously wrangling. No pressure!
On reflection, in practice there must be fifty shades of grey; a hybrid approach. It stands to reason that you can’t write a novel without some vague notion of the plot. And surely even the most pig-headed planners will change course for a humdinger of a brainwave.
Which brings me back to transatlantic semantics. While you can see where my loyalties lie, I ought to mention that ‘pants’ is also British slang for ‘rubbish’ or ‘hopeless’!
No comments have been added yet.
