How to Abandon Your Outline to Improve Your Story
By Steven James | January 26, 2016 |
Please welcome Steven James, the critically acclaimed author of thirteen novels. He serves as a contributing editor to Writer’s Digest Magazine, hosts the biweekly podcast The Story Blender, and has a master’s degree in storytelling. Publishers Weekly calls him “[a] master storyteller at the peak of his game.”
Steven’s groundbreaking book Story Trumps Structure: How to Write Unforgettable Fiction by Breaking the Rules won a Storytelling World award as one of the best resources for storytellers in 2015. When he’s not working on his next novel, Steven teaches Novel Writing Intensive retreats across the country with New York Times Bestselling author Robert Dugoni.
There are dozens of plot, structure, and outlining books out there, but almost no one teaches organic writing—and yet some of the most popular authors in the world write organically (Stephen King, Dean Koontz, and Lee Child, to name a few). I believe people can write better, more original, and more twist-filled stories by abandoning their outlines and trusting the narrative forces of believability, causality, and escalation.
Connect with Steven on his blog, on Twitter, and on Facebook.
How to Abandon Your Outline to Improve Your Story
On February 2, 2014, The Sunday Times related an interview with J.K. Rowling in which she admitted that she wrote the Hermione/Ron relationship as a form of wish fulfillment.
“That’s how it was conceived, really,” she said. “For reasons that have very little to do with literature and far more to do with me clinging to the plot as I first imagined it, Hermione ended up with Ron . . . It was a choice I made for very personal reasons, not for reasons of credibility.”
When she clung to her preconceived plot idea it didn’t lead her toward, but away from, credibility.
This is a common problem when we outline.
But are there ways to move past that? To jettison an outline and respond to the story as it develops?
Yes.
Here’s how to get started.
Focus on story, not plot.
At the heart of a story is tension, and at the heart of tension is unmet desire. So, at its core, a story isn’t primarily about what a character does, but what he pursues.
This pursuit, driven by desire, escalates as the character faces mounting setbacks on the way to a
satisfying climax.
Plot is the byproduct of pursuit, not its precursor.
As Ray Bradbury noted, “Remember: Plot is no more than footprints left in the snow after your characters have run by on their way to incredible destinations. Plot is observed after the fact rather than before. It cannot precede action. It is the chart that remains when an action is through.”
So, focus on the actions that your character takes in pursuit of his unmet desire. Let every choice in every scene be shaped by that pursuit, not by your preconception of what should happen to get “to the next plot point.”
Let context guide you.
Make sure that the character is sufficiently motivated to go to that next scene.
Often, when working from an outline, the choices the character makes end up being dictated not within the context of the scene—what makes sense in that moment—but from an authorial preconception of where things should go.
However, you won’t know what impact a scene will have on a character or how much time it’ll take him to process the things that happened during it until you read that scene in context.
What is on his mind? What would his most reasonable next step be? Are you letting his choice grow from context or pretext—what he would do, or what I want him to have done?
So how do you get all that context in your mind?
Read through the book from the beginning.
There have been times when I’ve spent the first ten hours of my writing day reviewing/editing my manuscript before I start writing the next scene.
Always opt for believability.
Outliners tend to have grand ideas of where the story should go, but gaps in logic emerge as the characters do inexplicable things in order to set up that memorable climax.
Everything is leading somewhere, but things don’t always make sense along the way.
One of the most important questions you can ask is, “What would this character naturally do in this situation?”
Then have him do it.
Always.
Really?
Yes.
Every one of his choices must make sense to him, and also, to your readers when it occurs.
Include more twists.
I still remember the day nearly a decade ago when I realized that I needed to change the killer in my novel The Knight. I’d been working on the book for a year and that whole time I thought I knew who the villain was.
But then two days before my deadline, I just couldn’t get the end to work. Only when I stepped back and looked at the story from a more objective perspective did I realize that if I kept that person as the killer it would seem like it was coming too far out of nowhere, but if I added more clues, things would be too predictable. The only solution was rewriting the book—which took another couple of months.
But it was worth it.
And no fans who’ve written to me so far have guessed the killer’s identity.
Twists must be both unexpected and inevitable. In other words, they must make sense, but also be a surprise. Try to end your scene in a way that no one will guess, but that everyone will nod after reading it—“Yes, I didn’t see that coming, but that’s the way it should end. Nice.”
Fulfill your promises.
Identify the promises—both overt and implied—and make sure you pay them all off.
If you draw attention to something, either by specificity (detail) or by magnitude (word count), it better matter, or readers are going to feel like they invested time and emotional energy into something “and it didn’t go anywhere.”
Okay, so how do you know if you’re on the right track?
Get out of the way.
J.K. Rowling admitted that her personal reasons got in the way of her story’s credibility.
Don’t let that happen to you. Set those assumptions, preconceptions, and storyboard ideas aside. Don’t ask “What should happen next?” Ask, “What would happen next if I got out of the way?”
Then do it.
That’s where your true story will be found.
What happens when you get out of the way? Does the story lead you in unexpected ways? Have you abandoned an outline?
Steven James is the award-winning, critically acclaimed author of more than fifty books, including seventeen novels. Publishers Weekly calls him “[A] master storyteller at the peak of his game.” His groundbreaking books on the craft of fiction, Story Trumps Structure and Troubleshooting Your Novel both won Storytelling World Awards of Excellence. When he’s not working on his next book, he teaches fiction writing at conferences spanning the globe and hosts the podcast The Story Blender. For all things Steven James, click to stevenjames.net.
Thank you, Mr. James. This is a hot topic for me. When I discovered outlining and those magical plot points, it was as if a whole new world had been opened up to me. Now I knew how a story worked. That makes it easy!
But a funny thing happened over the last few years. I wrote a series of 4 YA novels and self-published them (we can talk about that frustration another time). The first was carefully outlined and it got a favorable response from readers. Yay. The second was written during NaNoWriMo. Yes, I outlined, but when I wrote that fast, I found myself straying from the plot. And I let myself stray. Angel ‘n Me is, according to my readers, my best book to date. The last two returned to plotting, and they were, once again, just okay.
I still want to get a plot on paper, know my characters as much as possible, and so forth, but I suspect I’ll do more straying. Your post here is an encouragement. It’s very hard to “write in a way that scares you a little” when you’re carefully following your scene spreadsheet. I still cringe at the thought of all out pansting, but I think I will allow myself more freedom.
Thank you so much for joining us today. What an honor!
“Focus on the actions that your character takes in pursuit of his unmet desires.” Wow. And yes! I’m going through already-written chapters in a revision and seeing where I imposed my will on a scene rather than follow my protagonist’s desires. The change in thinking is enormous, as are the results. I was glad to hear you say you’ve spent hours re-reading and editing before writing a scene. As I get deeper into the middle of my story, I find I need to go back and do this often. I thought it was just me being thick. Hearing you say it is very validating. Thank you for a wonderful lesson this morning.
Writing without an outline feels like scary stuff to me… Will see..But thanks for the encouragement to enter the land of the unknown!
Steven, I read your book, “Story Trumps Structure” and found it to be one of the best I’ve read. My favorite line in your book is “Let narrative forces, rather than formulas drive, your story forward.” I’m not an outliner for my novels, no index cards, or character histories; very little is preplanned or designed for me. I think of myself as an “on the page” writer because that’s where I discover the story and the characters. But so many writing teachers and workshop instructors bash organic writers as “pansters” who use a faulty writing practice. During my earlier years of writing I thought I was weird and doing it wrong. Years of this kind of doubt was paralyzing because I’m horrible at outlining and preplotting; I hated doing it. I love your book because it validates that there is not just one writing path of preplanning and outlining. The day I found Ray Bradbury’s advice “First, find out what your hero wants, then just follow him” was eye-opening. I shed the doubts of being weird or faulty writer. Your book, of course, takes Ray’s advice to greater heights. It really is the ‘go to book’ for organic writers. Thank you for an important post today!
There’s nothing more fun in a story than twists, yet credibility (i.e., the action makes sense) is king when it comes to saying I really enjoyed a book or movie.
I’ve found that loose outlining keeps me on the path, but staying open to what is going on in the characters’ minds keeps the story true. And it’s a fun way to write, not knowing exactly where you’ll end up.
Thanks for a great post!
I like that this piece talks about “how” to abandon (or modify) one’s outline (if one has one) vs just letting it go and riding a hoped for flow.
Story, it does seem, is still king.
Thank you for this. You’ve made me feel validated and vindicated. When writers talk about having the next two or three books already outlined, it always makes feel lazy and inadequate. Like Paula, I’m an “on the page” writer. Character traits, back story and obstacles thrown in their way come to me as I write. And, I too, spend a lot of time going back and rereading, rewriting before I move forward. Only one novel published so far, but the comments I receive most often from readers are about the twists and turns and the unexpected ending. I don’t know if that would have been possible for me if I had laid everything out ahead of time. i certainly didn’t know how all those twists and turns were going to happen when I sat down to write. “Story Trumps Structure” has become my mantra. The book is on my shelf and I need to reread it. Stat!
Great post and I believe I am following your principles. For certain I reread and reread to become part of the story-from the character arc down to the smallest details of personality in action. And I find when doing that other doors open. I wish you the best with your work.
I LOVE your article and it couldn’t come at a better time.
I started on a new project in December and it stalled out over the holidays. I decided to outline, make a ton of notes and tent pole the plot points to avoid tons of rewrites this time. The first week of January slid into the second. By the third, I thought, “Screw it. I’m going to let my characters decide what to do.” It’s been working. I totally agree. Writing like that allows for all kinds of twists and turns. It’s the way my brain works anyway!
Thank you!
Steven–
I bought and read your book Story Trumps Structure, and I recommend it to others. In it, you contrast a rational/mechanical view of story development with a romantic/organic view. I’m a pantser/romantic all the way, so I like the contrast.
The rationalist treats her novel–more or less–as a mechanical device–say, a clock. She designs the parts (i.e., develops a detailed outline), then puts the parts together.
The romantic begins with a seed, which in your view is a character with a sought-after, unmet desire. Everything “grows out” of discovering and tracking the road to meeting that desire.
All this makes perfect sense, but the limitations are worth noting Everything is fine, provided the story is heavily dominated by a central POV character.
You say “there’s no such thing as either a plot-driven or a character-driven story. All stories are tension-driven.” In my view, this is something of a dodge. Granted, tension, i.e., conflict must be present in any novel. But some novels generate tension by successfully immersing the reader in the lives of the characters (Ruth Rendell, et al). Other successful novels gin up the tension/conflict level through surprise twists and pacing.
But that’s a small quibble. I learned a lot from Story Trumps Structure, and I encourage others to read it.
Thanks for this great article. It comes right as I’m second-guessing myself in the middle of my third novel.
I outlined my first book, but never really stuck to it. I think I needed the illusion of structure to give me confidence to go on at that point. I had also just recently discovered story structure and felt better seeing it laid out in black and white, even if I never followed it exactly.
Halfway through my second book, I discovered Dean Wesley Smith’s “Writing into the Dark” method, and immediately abandoned my outline. I’ve never had so much fun in my life and I think that book is much better for it.
I started my third book with no outline whatsoever and I don’t know how it will end, which is completely new to me. I feel like there are a few things that “have to” happen, but that’s been causing me a lot of problems. I feel like I’m forcing my desires on the story and it’s not working. So I needed to hear that it’s fine (preferable even!) to let the story go where the characters take it. They haven’t failed me so far, and I always feel so good when I’m just writing in that flow.
At last, someone who agrees with me. LOL. I have always written stories from an organic perspective. It seems to me that if you know your characters and what motivates them that writing organically should come quite naturally, though not necessarily easily.
Excellent article. Thanks for this.
Talk about timely! I put down a scene this morning that started to go in a different direction than I’d intended, deciding that I needed to think a bit longer about what comes next. As I read this post, the light bulb went on: I was trying to get my MC to act in a way that was unlike her, and the scene that follows–IF it follows–will need to be later in the story. Not now. She’s not there yet, in terms of her character arc, and the stakes haven’t gotten high enough.
I’m also encouraged by the notion of reading through the draft from the beginning. I’ve been avoiding that, specifically, to keep the inner editor at bay and get the story down where I can work on it. But it may be time to back up for a day and take stock.
Great post–thank you!
Hi, Steven:
So great to see you here. I’m heartened that so many people have mentioned reading Story Trumps Structure, which for my money is one of if not THE most useful writing guides I’ve come across in ages.
In particular, I’d like to add two gems from the book that resonate with this post. They’ve stuck with me because they’re both so simple and yet had a profound effect on how I looked at my writing.
First: Stories aren’t about what happens. They’re about what goes wrong. (I can’t tell you how useful those few words have been to me in my writing ever since I read them in STS.)
Second, on the issue of surprise. you identified what you called the Writer’s Paradox: Readers want to be able to predict what will happen. And they always want to be wrong. (That principle — the absolute need for surprise — when anchored to causality and believability, creates a demanding but workable approach to crafting truly compelling scenes — and stories.
Thanks for joining us here, Steven. Hope our paths cross before too long.
Thanks for the note. Great to join the crew.
It’s ironic that you mentioned my book, because I can’t seem to recommend The Art of Character fast enough to people.
Keep up the good work.
—s
I agree with everything in your article, Steven, except for the title. You don’t need to abandon an outline when you find problems with it; you can simply revise that outline to go in new directions.
I think many writers think of outlines as static maps you make only once at the start of each project, and then you either follow them or you don’t. To me, an outline is a living document is where I park all of my initial story ideas, and then I continuously adjust it as those ideas don’t work out or I come up with better ones.
So I don’t consider “outline” synonymous with “preconceived notion.” Sticking to your preconceived notions will get you in trouble whether you outline or not. I’m pretty sure J.K. Rowling didn’t make detailed outlines of all seven Harry Potter books before she wrote the first one, but she shipped Ron and Hermione so she forced them together in the end.
“Don’t ask “What should happen next?” Ask, “What would happen next if I got out of the way?”
Perfect. A post-it for the screen. Nothing to add to that! Great to see you here, Steven.
Thanks! It’s great to be here.
Yes! Things are always going sideways for me if I try to make the story be what I think it should be. There’s too much happening during the act of writing to ever actually anticipate it, and planning ahead, however helpful, is never exactly the same as writing. So there’s a lot of disconnect. I always have to remind myself to listen to what’s actually happening in the story instead of what my outline says.
Great stuff, Steven. One of my past tutors in a writers course said that this was the “female” way to go (the organic way); that is the “male” way was doing an outline. You have vindicated my view, at the time, that this was a tad sexist, but she and I have always been on the right path, at least. Perhaps it’s partly a personality difference, too. Can the leopard change its spots? Thanks for the extra insights.
Twists must be both unexpected and inevitable. In other words, they must make sense, but also be a surprise. Try to end your scene in a way that no one will guess, but that everyone will nod after reading it—“Yes, I didn’t see that coming, but that’s the way it should end. Nice.”
I love Chip & Dan Heath’s term for this – postdictable – in Made to Stick.
I’ve had the pleasure of hearing Steven multiple times at Craftfest and I always come away a better writer. Although I’ve always been an organic writer, part of me truly thought I was going it wrong because I ever heard was, “Outline, plan your plot, develop your characters before you begin, etc.” After listening to Steven, I never felt intimidated by those thoughts or the people who expressed them. James’ writing and teaching style is spot on. “Story Trumps Structure” is a great writing tool, and I’m looking forward to his next book on writing.
Steven, I have your book, “Story Trumps Structure,” and think it has plenty of insights that will help organic “pantser” writers such as myself. And you have a marvelous way with words. Thanks.
As an inveterate pantser who was recently saved by story structure, I’ve lived both ways. I don’t think any of the advice you’ve given about stories is bad or wrong, but I do think you’re unfairly conflating “outline” and “structure.”
Yes, if you cling too tightly to your preconceptions, your early imaginings, about the story, you can end up with forced endings, characters that aren’t believable, or plot lines that no longer make sense. But that can happen whether or not your wrote a single word of outline. In Rowling’s interview that you mentioned, I don’t get the impression that she was slavishly following an outline–it sounded to me more like she clung to her wishes rather than good sense.
As Larry Brooks points out in his “Story Physics” (a book I don’t recommend if you’ll get offended by someone trash-talking organic storytelling ;) ), you can use whatever process you want, but the forces that make a story great are still there, and the closer you adhere to them, the more likely your story will be. I think it’s to every writer’s advantage to learn what people’s expectations are, even if you don’t use an outline to meet them.
However, people have to use the process that works for them. Outlining to story structure has helped me write ten times faster (no lie), but I’m glad that there is a book out there that’s speaking to pantsers and helping them write.
Thanks for the shout out here, in a forum that feels like a Clan rally. So much of what Steven says is right-on… IF you can do it that way. The exact same thing is true about outlining… IF you can do it that way. This is what gets lost in this discussion. We all must find our way, and our process, and neither organic writing or outlining is right for everybody. I wish Steven would stop positioning this as THE way, the superior way, when if fact it is “a” way that works for many. Just as many famous authors plan their stories and outline them, don’t be fooled.
Beneath either outlining or organic writing is the pursuit of a story that works, and certain structural principles kick in once you land on that story that works. All this is – and it’s important – is a discussion about PROCESS, not outcome. And in the pursuit of that outcome, each writer must find their own way toward those truths, that don’t care how you got there. I write about the underlying truths about what makes stories work. Organic writers who understand them do it better than organic writers who don’t know them. That’s just a fact. When teachers like Steven say, “do it my way, because that’s the BEST way,” that’s just not true. Learn the underlying physics of a story that works, which apply to any story that works, and then, find your best and most blissful path toward it. I hope organic writing works for you (it does for me, and for Steven, because we’ve been studying those underlying physics for decades), but it’s like wandering through a forest… it’s a safer and more effective journey when you understand how to read a compass.
I’m not sure what “story physics” are. (Larry has a book by that name, but I’ve never read it.)
I don’t teach outlining because I think it’s a counterintuitive approach; a lot of people get turned off from writing by being told they need to do it; there are already plenty of resources out there on how to do it; and the drawbacks of it are substantial (and I don’t believe outweigh the benefits).
However, anyone who has listened to my podcast, The Story Blender, knows I give outliners a fair say. (By the way, if you haven’t listened to international bestselling crime novelist Jeffery Deaver’s interview last week, he gives excellent advice to outliners. Jeff sometimes writes 200 page outlines of his novels—listen here.)
Take heart, everyone. You don’t need to study “story physics” for decades to write organically or to write well. Don’t be intimidated or think that you need some sort of special training. Pursue the story, let context guide you, and avoid clinging to your preconceptions of where a story ought to go and you’ll be on your way to writing better fiction.
I still like outlines, but there is a time when I have to abandon it for the sake of the story and often I get good results. :)
” So, at its core, a story isn’t primarily about what a character does, but what he pursues.” Love this! Excellent advice to keep the story’s events true to the leading characters. I think a lot of times when stories flop, it’s because the events feel forced or don’t logically follow each other, much less the leading characters .