Outlining, Part 1 – Is There a Right and a Wrong Way to Do It?

This is the first in a two part series about outlining.

Before going any further, let me just say that I am NOT telling anyone how to outline or not outline their story. There is no right or wrong way to write a summary for a novel idea. There is also no reason to outline your story before you begin writing, if just diving headfirst into the process is what works best for you. I am not the only author who says/knows this; when asked this question, many professional writers say a beginner should write in whatever way works best for them.

But because there are two schools of thought on the subject, some people take the attitude that one method is right and the other wrong. This is not helpful to beginning authors who may have a method that works for them or are trying to find one. If their favorite writer advocates the option which doesn’t help the beginner, said novice could become discouraged and give up creating altogether. But the fact is that both structuring techniques are equally viable, depending on the writer’s skill set/preference, and whichever one works for you is the path to pursue.

So let’s look at what differentiates each of these types of writing in order that you may know what you are getting into, future writers. The first school of thought demands that every chapter be outlined in detail, while the second path advises authors to just “write it down and see how it turns out.” Daniel Arenson has stated that he is a member in good standing of the “outline every scene, then flesh it out to write your book” author – and he does not insist that everyone write books as he does. Meanwhile, Dean Koontz is the modern “pantser” par excellence.

It appears that there are two divergent trails before us, readers and future writers. One insists on planning out the story in complete detail, while the other simply starts writing. Most people call this latter path “pantsing” and the former – well, I am not sure what it is called in the current parlance. Dean Koontz’s preferred terms for these schools of thought are the ones this author chooses to use: the first type of writer is that which he (or someone he likes to quote) identifies as the architects. These are the creators who, like Mr. Arenson, plan out everything about their novel before they even start the first chapter.

The other type of writer – of which Mr. Koontz is an example – is what he calls “gardeners.” These authors start with the seeds of an idea and nurture it, page by page, chapter by chapter, until it becomes a book. They do not plan out anything, and everything in their calculus is subject to change at a moment’s notice. In his novels, Mr. Koontz describes this change as coming directly from the characters, which is a nice way of considering it.

This brings us to what I stated above; while these two paths of writing thought appear to be the only ones we have, the truth is that I think – and practice – a third way. That subject will wait until next week, however, when it can be explored in more depth. For today, the focus is on defining these two different outlining methods.

For the architectural writer, the detailed sketch offers structure. He knows exactly where his characters are going and how they will get there. There are a minimum of surprises for him and, because everything is planned out, he should be able to avoid making continuity errors or forgetting some aspect of his fictional universe(s). He will also be able to keep the story/series he is writing steady throughout the novel(s).

This path of writing removes doubt and a sense of being lost in the wilderness from the creative process. In a way, architectural writing is like having a map and a compass which prevent the writer from getting lost in the weeds of his fictional world(s), or which assures him of his heading. It is a great comfort for some writers, who would literally be lost without such precautions, rendering them unable to complete a story or series.

However, for others, detailed maps are more of a hindrance than a help. Writers who are “gardeners” often find the magic goes out of creating if they plan out every aspect of their world and characters before jumping headfirst into the story. Rather than keep to the main avenues, these writers are explorers who prefer to glance at the map and compass only when they feel they are drifting away from their goal. As long as they don’t drift off course, they will enjoy the journey to their destination (the end of their story/series).

So riddle yourselves this, future writers – are you an architect or a gardener? Do you like using a map and compass for your story, or do you keep them both in your back pocket until you need them? Neither choice is wrong. No accomplished author with sense is going to attack you for choosing gardening over detailed architecture. Why should they? Both types of outlining have the same end result – a complete story, with heroes and villains readers can enjoy. Why not applaud a beginner for reaching the goal by whichever method works for her?

There is one slight caveat to this recommendation, though. If you want advice for your chosen outlining technique, you might like to look up those authors who practice the same process which you do. You don’t have to like their stories to benefit from their experiences; all that is necessary is that you absorb the advice they have that is applicable to you. Once that is done, your writing – and your stories – will become better as their creator adapts and grows in skill.

So if you are a gardener, look up authors like Mr. Koontz to see what advice he offers. For the architects reading this, check out writers like Daniel Arenson and see what they have to say about structuring a story. Then go have fun creating new worlds and meeting new people – in and out of fiction.

If you liked this article, friend Caroline Furlong on Facebook or follow her here at www.carolinefurlong.wordpress.com.