Plotters vs. Pantsers: Can You Guess Which Side Stephen King and J.K. Rowling Are On?

Michał wrote: "Jean wrote: "Imagine Proust writing "A la recherche du temps perdu" from an outline!"

What's weird about that?"

What's so fascinating about Proust's books is that they feed on one another, from the first to the next, expanding both in literary value as in emotional context, but logic? Not so much.

I'm hell of a Panster. That's my number one issue, in fact. I can't seem to write once I've plotted the thing, or else it drives me mad. I like to surprise myself... yes, I am THAT selfish with my writings. But then there is the big outline, which you can never let out, or else... well you're ending up writing Fifty Shades Of Grey and you're a multimillionaire best-selling author in no time. You know, the kind of things you wouldn't want to see happen.
I like to think I'm both a Panster and a Plotter, but I'm definitely a Panster-aholic. If that can be a thing.

If you aren't writing formula books and aren't a closet autobiographer, how can a novel or story be told other than by a pantser? Once you start thinking about what some new character would do, aren't you bound to find out new things about them which change their consequent actions?

Tony wrote: "If you aren't writing formula books and aren't a closet autobiographer, how can a novel or story be told other than by a pantser? Once you start thinking about what some new character would do, are..."

I think the particular trait of the Panster as described in this debate is that he or she will make up the major part of the story along the way, never or barely building up detailed drafts and/or chapters summaries.
However, I still agree with your point : a writer is, to the core, automatically a Panster.

Maria wrote: "Tony wrote: "If you aren't writing formula books and aren't a closet autobiographer, how can a novel or story be told other than by a pantser? Once you start thinking about what some new character ..."

That's the way I understood it, too.
For example, a true "panster"(sorry, David!) is Cesar Aira, from Argentina. He chucks out several short books a year, and never does any editing. Ever.

E. wrote: "Definitely a Pantser, both the way I write and the stories I read.

The difference can be seen in the ending scenes - plotted books seem more predictable, since everything leads up to that point. ..."

Well from a reader's point in Harry Potter series: no.. not very predictable.. as in barely at all. lol

A good plotter to be born has his/her story told again and again in their head(which is the main characteristic of a pantser). So.... I think all plotters are basically pantsers:D


Did that make any sense?

Louie wrote: "E. wrote: "Most of the photogra..."

And most photographers are bad photographers who like to talk about the process and equipment rather than actually take pictures... kinda like what bad writers..."

Must be you know some bad photographers... My friends know their way around a lens like I know my way around an engine. Being a sought-after mech, I'd say that's pretty good! lol

Create the character, and live beside them for a while. Follow them everywhere they go, or want to go.

As a writer, I'd like to say I'm a rigid and meticulous planner, but beyond a rough outline/game plan I usually end up writing by the seat-of-my-pants (usually because my characters have hijacked the thing and run with the story, leaving me nothing to do but type as fast as I can). It can make for disorganized writing as things go off-topic, tangents are explored and dead-ends are run-into, but I don't do well with detailed planning as it seems to remove all sparks of creativity from my head. I really wish I could write in the whole outline/index cards/plotting style, nailing down every aspect of my project before I begin, and I have tried, but it always seems to make things worse: the story never takes off, becoming one gigantic dead-end. I mean, not even sitting there writing nonsense helps jump start the process. I will say, I splurged on the Scrivener software a few months back and that's helped as I'm able to work in bits and pieces, shuffle things around, hold things back, shove things in folders and use them later, and basically translate my chaotic physical writing process (which involves lots of notes on lots of paper, resulting in overstuffed three-ring binders) into digital format.

As a reader, frankly, I don't care which one an author is, as long as they can tell a damn good story that keeps me reading up until the wee hours of the night!

I think that unless the plot start goes totally off to the far left of where the rest of the series started out from. Then I can't really tell the difference between a plotter or a pantster story. But I'll be honest when I used to try and do little stories when I was younger, although I could admire folks that could just dive in and start writing cause they lived and breathed their characters and their worlds that much. I could NEVER truly do that myself. I had tried and I would always hit a wall somewhere. And yet when I tried to plot it all out I would hit another wall cause things became too forced. So I guess I was a half and halfer sometimes.

The best way is for the plotting to take care of itself largely on the sub conscious level. I think Stephen King works in this way, and is a master of letting the different layers of his mind take care of different layers of the story. When you plot too much on the conscious level it comes across as too contrived to the reader who will see through most designs for what they are, and will see them as constraints on the life of the story and the characters. Having said that I have enjoyed reading a range of styles, from the detailed and intricate plots of the Dune novels of Frank Herbert, to the fable-like tales, where characters become symbolic, as in Hermann Hesse, to the gritty, in the moment approach of Stephen King, with characters responding realistically to what is happening to them right now.

For me it depends on the type of story that I'm writing.

For example, I have a couple random stories that I just started writing one day with no direction that developed into thier own thing.

While I am currently writing a Historical Fiction short story that, because of the historical aspect, has to be plotted out.

It's easier for me to just sit down and start writing, but it's kind of interesting to see how plotting and research can affect your writing over all.

When I read, as long as I don't notice I don't care what type of writer I prefer.

When I personally write I plot out a lot of the story though sometimes events don't turn out the same or are played the exact same way (and also there have been a few instances I have done "pantser-writing" as well).

Didn't realise that there was a difference! If a book is a good read, then that's all that matters to me.

One book I wrote started as a definite pantser, but when I went back to do the second draft I added structure and plot!

I have to admit to being a pantser. I can see the benefits being a plotter might bring but, I've tried it, and I just don't get on with it. I really like the organic process of one idea pin-balling into another and perhaps completely changing the whole flow or even premise of the story. As a musician, I would liken it to getting a great song from a jam session. I try to overcome the chaos this might bring by beginning every writing session with reading again from the start of what I've already written; editing as I go and thinking about what new ideas might work with what I've already got; mulling over what might need to change and what's now (or might become) a plot hole or inconsistency.

As with most things in life, I don't think there's a definite right and a wrong here. People should adopt whatever style makes them write more and better stuff.

i'm a little of both to be honest.

Aaaand Stephen King's a douchebag.

David wrote: "We are all, most of us are, university educated ADULTS...let us embrace the role.


No offence David, but that statement sounds so pompous. As if being a university educated adult is anything to be that proud of. If anything it sounds like university has taught you to be pretenious and arrogant. Try not to confuse education with intelligence or perception.

I'm a big fan of JK Rowling and I'm a big fan of Margaret Atwood so I guess I can't tell the difference? Though, I will say, the Harry Potter series would almost HAVE to be extensively planned. As with most fantasy novels. I don't see how you could do it otherwise.

I write a little bit. I'm about halfway into a novel and I expected myself to be a planner but I'm a total pantser when it comes to writing.

Stephen King and J.K. Rowling are of my favorite authors, so I guess I like both. The truth is, you can be a plotter and write a bad book, the same with the "Pantsers" .When I start reading a book the first chapters are the ones that keep me going, I don't care what kind of "strategy" the author used to write the book, I jut love the magic that they created and to be amazed when i finish a book and think: Damn, I want to read this book again or, I want another book like this one again!

I'm a pantsers. I have a basic idea of a plot and I know where my story is going to start and where I want it to finish. I introduce the characters in the story and I let them tell me where they want to go. I do, at times, guide them towards a direction I'd like to see them going but in the end I try to let their personalities dictate the story. It's like life, we all have a plan when we get out of bed in the morning but we all know it's not going to go as completely as we had hoped.

I'm a little bit of both. I'm a serious plotter....but then I tend to fly by the seat of my pants once I start writing. That is to say, I leave myself open to changing things or tweaking plot lines at the last minute if I suddenly think they'll improve the story. I don't think I've EVER written a book where the finished product was absolutely identical to the initial plot line. Sometimes.....these stories just have a mind of their own!

Anyone know which camp Ted Dekker falls into?

I would guess plotter....

Claudia wrote: "Stephen King and J.K. Rowling are of my favorite authors, so I guess I like both. The truth is, you can be a plotter and write a bad book, the same with the "Pantsers" .When I start reading a book ..."

Hear, hear!

Michał wrote: "Of course Stephen King has to be a douche about people who write in a different manner that he does. Maybe if he used an outline, a great story like Library Policeman wouldn't have ended like crap."

Agreed!

Intricate plotting has never appealed to me. I tend to take a story idea, make some brief notes, begin writing, and see what happens. What I write in any particular session opens up a variety of possibilities to explore in the next. As the plot expands, so do the choices. I generally have an idea how my stories will end, but the thrill is in following unscripted paths to get there. Characters and events appear as needed to move the narrative along, and often offer dynamic new dimensions to explore. As I write and the story gains form, I jot down ideas for necessary future scenes that will help bind the story together. At some point, everything crystalizes, the plot finds its groove, and you know exactly where you’re going and how to get there. When it all comes together, you marvel at how the plot choices you made became solid links in a sturdy chain. I find myself in awe over the process, how the act of putting pen to paper can turn out a viable short story, poem, or novel. Sometimes I wonder if the story has always been there, residing in some mystical realm, with the writer simply a vessel charged with seeing it manifested in the world.

If Stephen King disparages plotters then I know my mind is made up in favor of the outline. King hasn't written a new idea in decades and he hasn't entertained me in much longer.

An exceptional writer can craft a great story by being a panster. More methodical writers tend to plot the storyline first. If your writing is not good, being a panster will show and readers will pick up on problems with flow and direction. But focusing too heavily on the plot and not allowing the process to unfold organically can also lead to stilted writing. It really comes down to personal style but ultimately the skill of the writer carries more weight than the style to which he/she adheres.

I think i prefer plotters. The amount of thought and planning that Rowling put into the Harry Potter series always amazed me, where as some books by Pantsers while brilliant, seems a bit thrown together. Just thinking of all the intricacies tying together is like a beautiful piece of art, it just works.

Renee wrote: "The important thing for readers who aren't also writers to know about this is that these methods describe the way writers write the first drafts of their books. By the time a book has gone through ..."

that's a good point.

I am definitely a pantser.
If I don't know where the book is going when I write it, how is the reader going to know???
Read "The Prestoj" to find out how successfully I do it

I believe there are advantages to both methods of writing and I tend to bounce between them in my own writing.

I go pants-plan-pants-plan all the time. Sometimes pantsing works better for some scenes, but others are too particular for it so need to be planned.

I am definitely a plotter! I need to be organized. My outline begins pretty vaguely but will flesh out as I go along. Before I start writing I know what will happen and how it will end just not all the minor details :)

Renee wrote: "The important thing for readers who aren't also writers to know about this is that these methods describe the way writers write the first drafts of their books. By the time a book has gone through ..."

Exactly my own thoughts. Thanks for saying it. :-)

I"m a plotter to a tee, I love writing everything down about the world and making character profiles and the chapter outline. Then it hits me that I have to start writing. That said when a character decides to go against the plan I let them, its really their story not mine.

I would have thought I prefer Plotters but I've read two of the Pantser examples and none of the Plotters... (And MANY MANY Atwood books, i might add)

You can't pants a high fantasy set in a different world, in which you have a set of con languages that appear in the story at some point and of which you need to know the grammar and rules, a variety of locations with made up (of course) names, and scientific physical/astrological/chemical laws different from Earth's, without getting lost somewhere 25% into it.

In such stories, it's more about worldbuilding than plot.

Pantsing works more for contemporary fiction, or just stories set on Earth, be they urban fantasies or dystopias. In Stephen King's case, his stories are usually set on Earth and while most of them include supernatural themes, they are still possible to be written in a pantser's way.

I write the ultimate high fantasy/hard science fiction mixture, so I can't pants.

E. B. White said, "Columbus didn't just sailed. He sailed west."

A compromise between outliners and organics is Writing into the Dark...check it out on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/Writing-into-D...

While I’m writing I’m do more of both. I write an extremely vague plot with a distinct beginning and ending with. Most other details of the story is discovery writing or “pantser.” I typically dont enjoy coming up with a solid plot for my story because I already know everything that is going to happen. It makes the writer thief selves a whole lot more interested in the story if they themselves don’t know where it’s going to go. Or that’s just how it goes with me. Unlike many other pantsers I make sure to really know and understand my main characters before putting them in my literary worlds. I do enjoy reading Stephen King because of the fact he is a Discovery writer i makes his stories a lot harder to predict how everything will go down. I agree with Stephen King and his thoughts on planning, it tends to make the writing boring.

Kelly wrote: "I'm not a writer, if I was, I know with y memory and 'talent' for forgetting important tidbits says I should only be a potter, but my lazy ass says 'creativity is spontaneous!!!'
My fav. author mu..."

I would bet that authors are more able to pants long stories than the rest of us mere mortals could understand, and pantsing 10000 page books might not be altogether uncommon.

I used to be 100% vinyl plotter cutters. In recent years, I've tried winging it and usually got to about the halfway point and then plotted the remainder of the novel. I've since gone back to at least a rough outline before I start, for the most part.