I’m about two-thirds of the way through a book I am reading to review for Library Journal. The book is called J.M. Coetzee and the Life of Writing by David Attwell. It is a sort of writing biography of Coetzee and is quite good. If you are a fan of the writer, this is one you will probably want to look out for.
I am also still working my way through all the lessons in the James Patterson Master Class.
Over the weekend Patterson and Coetzee provided a fascinating opportunity to glimpse and compared the writing process of two well-known writers. The writing process has always fascinated me. Everyone has one and goes about putting words on paper or computer screen in a variety of ways. Some writers fetishize certain objects —they have to write with a particular pen in a certain color on a particular kind of paper, or while pounding away at the keyboard there has to be particular piece by Mozart playing and there has to be a cup of tea/coffee in a certain mug placed just so on the desk — and claim to not be able to write without them. Some writers need to have a title first, or write the last sentence first or start in the middle or always begin a new project on the same date or sit down to write at the same exact time every day.
The actual writing part though, there are only so many ways a person can go about it, nonetheless, it remains a perennial and dreaded question at book readings, the moment someone in the audience stands up and asks, “so how did you go about writing this book?” What is wanted, of course, is the secret that only “real” writers know. The password, the handshake, the mystery revealed, the drug, the prayer, the key to it all so that said audience member can go home and write that novel they have inside them and make millions doing it. No one wants to hear an author say the truth, I sat down and wrote for six hours every day, seven days a week for four months (or more) and wrote and rewrote and wrote some more and tossed out and started over and wrote some more and rewrote over and over until it was done. What’s an author to do? Tell the truth no one wants to hear or make something up? The third option is avoiding answering the question entirely. I have heard all three answers at one time or another.
Of course in Patterson’s online writing class he has to address the question, he is the teacher and it is his job to explain how to write a novel. Patterson takes the truthful route but at the same time he makes it sound rather easy. To write a novel, one must first write an outline, do not begin writing without an outline, your book will be doomed. For Patterson, an outline is not the kind you had to do in school with the Roman numerals and the letters and headings and subheadings. He means a narrative outline. There are still numbers but the numbers correspond to chapters and basically what you are writing is a summary of the chapter. With such an outline you can work out plot and pacing before you get in too deep. You can find the slow bits and the holes and fix them before they grow out of control. That’s the idea anyway.
And it seems like a good idea that is really useful for a plot-driven James Patterson sort of novel. Heck, it is probably a good idea for a variety of novel types. It is neat and tidy. And of course once you have your outline, you know how you are going to get from point A to B to C. You know what happens in each chapter. All you have to do is fill in the details. Easy!
Coetzee’s approach is so much messier. No outline, just write. Draft after draft after draft. He makes notes as he goes. He changes character names and locations and plot and then he changes them back again and then he changes them again to something else entirely. It is organic and labyrinthine. It is a journey in which the ending is not known in advance, but is rather a sort of quest; a quest for a story, a quest for an answer to a question, a quest for understanding, a quest for any number of things. No bones about it, it is a lot of work.
And I find myself wondering, do the two approaches reflect the differences between commercial fiction and Nobel Prize winning fiction? Could an author whose process is like Patterson’s win a Nobel? Could someone whose process is like Coetzee’s be successful at commercial fiction and spend 24 weeks on top of the bestseller lists? Which comes first, the process or the desire to write a certain kind of fiction? Do people who make outlines naturally make a course for more commercial fiction? Do the messy organic writers automatically find themselves in literary fiction? And what about other kinds of writing, genre and nonfiction in all its variety? Is this a chicken or egg question?
Maybe. Probably. Likely the answer is a combination of all sorts of factors but it is interesting to consider.
Gosh–fun to read how they write!!
LikeLike
booksandbuttons, it’s interesting, isn’t it? A look behind the curtain so to speak.
LikeLike
I would think that writing the same characters for a popular series (like Patterson’s Alex Cross or Women’s Murder Club) would also greatly affect the writing process. Sometimes fans of series don’t want too much change from their beloved characters, which might lend itself to the outline formula. I’ve not read either Patterson or Coetzee – but it is always interesting to see how writers create!
LikeLike
Laila, I imagine you are right about the process of writing a series. I’ve not read Patterson of Coetzee either. I do have plans to read Coetzee sometime though. Reading the book about him and all of the background of what went in to the creation of each novel has been really fascinating and making me curious 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am not sure about the outlining of the story…Writing is a very cathartic and internal process…words and plots take their own life and charterers define their own destiny as you start writing….outlining the story seems very restrictive and hardly something that is spawns more the depth of the soul, which I believe is critical for any good writing….it is like Coetzee says an organic process….
LikeLike
cirtnecce, so you are on the Coetzee end of the spectrum 🙂
LikeLike
In the writing process it is always interesting to know how other writers went through theirs. Thank you dear, it was good to read and I hope I will be able to overcome some of my troubles by help of Coetzee and of course you.
Thanks again.
LikeLike
Dhamesh, I agree, the writing process is always a fascinating one. Thanks for stopping by and for your comment!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know it’s about films, not books, but Hitchcock said that he found the process of actually filming quite dull – the exciting creative process was the planning and story-boarding. I do find this model quite appealing, the idea that the planning is at least as imaginative and exciting as the drafting and writing.
LikeLike
shoshi, I seem to recall hearing something like that about Hitchcock. I think there can be quite a lot of creativity that goes into planning especially when it is the basis of the project. One needs a good foundation to build on 🙂
LikeLike
This is really interesting to think about. I’ve always assumed each writer had a method that worked best for them regarding extensive outlining vs. organic writing – and that it might vary book by book even. But it would be so very interesting to have an accurate chart that shows the writing method for all the Pulitzers, Nobels, or NYT Bestsellers – seeing the breakdown would be fascinating.
I’ve also often wondered while reading historical fiction (or fiction that centers around a topic that requires a lot of research) when in the process that research takes place. I’m sure this varies a lot author to author too – but knowing the details of how research fits into the writing process is something that’s very interesting to me.
Thanks for this great post & thoughts!
LikeLike
Emily, I think it would definitely be interesting to chart prizewinners and bestsellers and compare methods. The books that manage to be both prize winners and bestsellers might be most fascinating of all.
I’m no expert, but from stuff I have read and heard from historical fiction authors, it seems there is quite a bit of upfront research on the historical period and say, if you know your main character is going to be a blacksmith in 1650 London you will need to find out about that. The rest, I think would probably happen as you go along as you need it. Patterson talks about research in one of his lessons and he likes to do a lot upfront and even try to visit locations he is planning on using. Then he does additional research as needed. It’s really interesting!
LikeLike
Thank you this post – a very interesting read! I’m definitely more in Patterson’s camp. I find it much easier to pace (and complete) my story when I have a plot outline. I also find writing detailed character backgrounds helps. I think it can certainly be useful to try both approaches though. Sometimes the writing process can fall off if you get stuck into a routine.
LikeLike
Julia, thanks! And thanks for your comment on your own writing process too!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I write reports and briefs, not novels. But I find that even within those limits I need some sort of “outline” or structure to make sure I cover necessary issues. So, I think if I was a novelist, I would definitely be one who would create a roadmap vis a vis chapter descriptions – at the very least. I’m the sort who still keeps a Day-Timer so I can “outline” the days of my work week. So, I don’t think I could “wing it,” but then…I also don’t think I could be a writer. “Whatever works”, is my motto. The class sounds fascinating and after it is all over, will you critique it for those of us who may plunk down the cash to take it?
LikeLike
Grad, you crack me up 🙂 I use “so” way too much and sometimes I catch myself and sometimes I don’t. It is a handy little transition word. And yes, when the Patterson class is all over I will write up an entire post about it.
LikeLike
However, if I was a writer I would never use the word “so” again. At least not “so” many times in one paragraph. Maybe I need that course.
LikeLike
What surprises me is that quite a few mystery writers, who would seem to be prime candidates for the Patterson method veer much more closely to the Coetzee style. Wonder if they split into more character or plot driven work? Perhaps a heavy use of sticky notes is necessary? Always fascinating to hear about the creative process though.
LikeLike
Jule, that’s really interesting! Perhaps it is more of a character and plot divide. I’ve heard some writers talk about their wall of sticky notes. I suppose that is a different form of outline, one that is more visual. The creative process is a fascinating topic 🙂
LikeLike
I’m always interested in learning more about the writing process. It fascinates me, the way writers talk or write about their routine. The hardest part is discovering what works for you. I wrote my first novel without an outline – I rather like surprises and I’ve had my share. The ending was a little difficult to come by but when it did, it was worth the wait.
LikeLike
Delia, I think learning about other people’s process is interesting because one might be able to learn about something that can be incorporated into one’s own process and be very useful. Thanks for sharing a little about your own process!
LikeLike
I have the impression that it’s more of a character thing than a type of book thing, but that’s just an impression. I am sure there’s a research project in this…
One writer wrote that if she knows too much then she gets too bored to write the book; another that she plans the beginning and the end but then likes to ‘discover’ how to get there through the writing; another that if she doesn’t know what has to happen then everything goes off track and flat. Will Self, who you might think would be more of a ‘plunge in’ sort of writer, has a wall of post-its. I think it’s all fascinating.
LikeLike
Helen, that may be the case. I too am sure there is a research project but it will not be mine! Feel free to run with it if you are inclined 🙂 It is a fascinating topic that’s for sure!
LikeLike
I hope no one who wants a magic wand ever asks Colm Toibin how he wrote ‘Nora Webster. He started it in 2000 and only finished it in 2014. I can’t think that is the sort of answer the aspiring author is going to want!
LikeLike
Alex, whoa! Fourteen years to write a book? But then he did other stuff during that time too but still, clearly no magic wand!
LikeLike
What a fascinating comparison! I am a bit afraid of detailed outlines, because after writing it I feel constrained and so my writing is plodding along the lines. But I totally get why it sounds so much more efficient.
LikeLike
smithereens, since you write, the important thing is you know the best process for yourself. I can totally understand feeling constrained by an outline!
LikeLike
It would make sense that two very different types of books would call for different writing styles, but then again–ask ten authors and I bet you will get ten different answers. It sounds like a fun comparison of writers and styles–serendipity that both books ended up in your lap at the same time!
LikeLike
Danielle, it would be an interesting study to look into the writing process of a variety of authors to find out if there is any kind of discernible pattern. I’ll add it to the very long list of things to do one day when I have time 😀
LikeLike
Pingback: Writing and Naming | So Many Books