Late update: I just received an email from Joseph D'Agnese where he said:
Mr Edgerton:
I tried to leave a comment on your recent post on outlining but the system devoured it whole.
The
outlining method you describe was first described by journalist Jon
Franklin in his book Writing for Story. Great book, but it is mostly
focused on writing in-depth journalism pieces. My wife and I love that
book and refer to it often. But I have always struggled with how to
apply his method to longer works of fiction. I think my hangup has
always been about to describe an entire book in only five sentences. But
I think you have nailed it. Thank you!
Joe
I thanked him for not only letting me know who to give credit for the outlining method, but for going the extra mile in reaching me--much appreciated! So now you know where I got it--from the legendary Jon Franklin!
Also, Joe isn't the first person who's contacted me and told me he couldn't post a comment here. I don't know what to do about that--does anyone have any solutions or suggestions? Keep in mind I barely know what a keyboard is and very little about how the Intergnat works--especially blogs! I hate it that people try to comment and are unable to--my apologies!
Hi folks,
Today, fellow writer Ransom Noble posted an article on outlining in her blog and she graciously mentioned my method. Since I last posted it in 2010, I thought perhaps it might be time for a rerun. Also, I have some exciting news--I have a cover for my newest novel, THE GENUINE, IMITATION, PLASTIC KIDNAPPING coming out in October from Down&Out Books. You'll see it at the end of this article. Hope you like it and hope you'll buy the book when it comes out!
OUTLINING
A STORY
Anyone
on this blog whom I’ve taught will recognize the following. It’s always the
first lesson I give in both online and “on-ground” creative writing classes. I
decided to post this because recently, on another forum, I’ve been seeing a lot
of conversations based on outlining. What I’ve observed from their remarks is
that the great majority have only experienced one kind of outline—that old
composition thing with the Roman numerals that go on for pages… What I’m going
to show here is a very different kind of outline. One that makes sense. Is
infinitely simpler and actually works.
Let’s
cover some history first…
Like a lot of writers, I wasted a
lot of time in my writing career simply because I ignored what is probably the
biggest "secret" in creating short stories and novels. I didn't
outline.
Outlines were a particular type
of hell English teachers visited upon you - those horrid things with Roman
numerals and topics and subtopics and all that junk. Yuch! Outlining took all
the fun out of reading a book.
I also read interviews with
writers who said they never outlined. It would destroy their
"creativity" many claimed. The way to write a story was to create a
character, start them out in trouble and kind of follow them around as they had
neat adventures. What it took years to realize was that my characters had great
adventures and it was kind of fun following them around...until somewhere
between pages eight and twenty when they would peter out. I had a drawerful of
some of the best starts of stories you ever saw. Problem was, they never went
anywhere. And most of them never came close to an ending. Oh, a few did, the
really short ones. There were even one or two that came to a respectable
length...after rewriting them twenty times.
What I didn't realize for the
longest time was that writing involves the processing and integration of large
blocks of trivial bits of information. As the length of my stories grew, so did
the complexity. All of a sudden, I was on page thirteen and I suddenly
remembered I couldn't have my character chase the bad guy...because on page two
I'd given him bronchial asthma. I had to go back and "cure" him. What
I didn't realize was something pretty obvious. A story, like the life it
represents, is basically complex. Stories aren't built like a line of dominoes,
it more resembles a web, and when you tug a bit harder on one of its many
strands, the whole business vibrates. And changes shape. Not only did I have to
remember the many details and their connections, I had to keep them in a
logical order. Virtually impossible.
I even managed to write several
books in this manner. Looking back on those days I cringe. What an awful lot of
energy I needlessly wasted!
Here was my typical process. I
bet at least some of you have gone through the same procedure. I'd get a great
idea, so great that I'd have to drop the baby if I was holding him, and fly to
my typewriter. (Remember - this was in the days of yore when they had those
ancient artifacts...) As fast as my fingers could fly, I'd write. A hundred
words would accumulate. Then, two hundred. Then...well, then I began to run
into problems.
Something I did in the first
hundred words didn't quite fit with the three hundredth, but I wasn't quite
sure what it was. Something was just "off". It would bother and
confuse me, but I didn't want to deal with it. So, I'd push on, fix it later,
whatever it was. Just get the stuff out, in the white heat of creativity.
That's what rewriting was for, right? To fix stuff that didn't fit.
Only now the writing really
slowed. The next fifty words were the hardest. I was running out of steam. The
idea I'd begun with seemed stale, trite. If I could even remember the original
idea. Crap! I'd say, finally, slamming shut the typewriter case. Maybe tomorrow
the Muse would redescend...
Hardly ever happened. On the
morrow, a new idea would strike, with the same kind of heat as the first one
and I'd be off and running with that one.
With the same results.
In no time at all, I had boxes of
unfinished stories. Sound familiar?
Well, I learned a trick. I won't
go through the whole sorry history of how I wasted time and learned, little by
little, to work smarter. What happened, after many centuries (well, it seems
like that now) was that I began kind of jotting down a half page of notes. I
even began figuring out my endings before I began.
Now I began to finish stories.
Not a lot, but a lot more than I had previously. After a couple of years of
this, I began to expand my notes. Never once did I think of what I was doing as
"outlining." There weren't any Roman numeral. How could that be an
outline?
And then...one day I got one of
those Joycean epiphanies. What I was doing was an outline! But, these weren't
outlines like Missus Grundy had us doing back in P.S. 121. These were just
notes. Notes kind of organized. And I discovered something else. Those old
writers were liars. Hemingway, Steinbeck and Shakespeare - they all claimed
they didn't outline, but they had to. Their stuff all held the kind of integrity
that only comes in thinking through a project first before you pick up the saw.
They just said they didn't outline. All of a sudden, I knew better.
Those guys probably didn't think they outlined either. I doubt if any of them
had Roman numerals on their notes either. I'd bet money they had notes, though,
and copious notes...and copious notes organized into some kind of system.
Before they ever picked up the ol' writing quill and wrote "Chapter
One". Probably what a lot of them did was write a first draft...and then
used that for their "outline". Without calling it that, of course, or
even thinking of it in that way. Hemingway didn’t outline—he had 80,000 word
outlines (also called a “first draft). Same thing, just a bit cumbersome and
time-consuming to create. I bet that's what they did though. They weren't any
different than I was. Or you. If any writer begins their story without knowing
precisely where they're going, any mistakes they make at first, any tiny
omissions, take on added significance as he or she proceeds. As length grows
linearly, complexity expands exponentially. Fact of life. The writing
life anyway.
If one is muleheaded enough, a
story can be bulled through without outlining. Even fairly long stories. It's
kind of a masochistic exercise though. It may take twenty, even thirty rewrites
to get a decent story that way.
Don't ask me how I know this.
I'll begin crying. I'll have to. My wife knows I recall experiences like this
and keeps all the sharp instruments locked up.
Novels are the worst experience
in the world without an outline. After you spend several years learning to
juggle thousands of details in your head - you can get pretty good at it - you
can write longer and longer material. Except, that no matter how good you get
at retaining all this stuff in your head, you'll probably end up stuck on about
page ninety. That seems to be the magic length for novels. Not quite long
enough by about three hundred pages. Short stories seem to peter out around
between pages six to eight.
If you've got an outline you just
don't have these problems. Stuck? Glance up at your outline and instantly
you'll be reminded where you are in the story and your perspective will return.
The dizzy feeling will recede.
Okay. Sales pitch for outlines
over. I learned my technique from taking screenplay writing classes. Those guys
always outline. That's how they can write scripts so quickly. I took a
class in this program with Martin Goldstein and I wrote a 108-page script in
two days. And Mr. Goldstein says it's a great script - has attached himself to
it as the producer and not only that - this "two-day" script was just
named a semifinalist in the Academy Foundation's Nicholl’s Fellowships in
Screenwriting awards. Not bad for two days work! I wrote the first 64 pages in
about eight hours and the remaining 44 pages in about ten hours. Piece of cake.
Of course, I spent about a week and a half on the outline. I do write quickly,
so don't use my times as a model. Without an outline, I'd still be writing...
Let's get to these puppies.
Here's how you create an outline for your story. Ready?
1. You make notes to yourself as
you imagine the story played out.
2. You arrange those notes.
3. As the writing proceeds, you
refer to them.
That's it. Or so I thought at the
time. It was a lot easier than what I used to do, but there was still something
I was to learn.
I got lucky. I happened on a book
that really opened my eyes as far as outlines. I honestly can’t remember the
book—I’ve got thousands and thousands and thousands of books, literally—and I
wish I could so I could give the author his proper credit (I do remember it was
a man), but he gave me the best outlining tool I’ve ever come across. It’s
nothing at all like those ten-pound puppies with the Roman numerals as you’ll
see.
The outline I propose you try
that I took from this guy’s book on writing consists of five simple statements
that describe the major actions through which the story will be told. One
statement for each major focus. And each statement will be short, consisting
only of two to three words. A human noun, a strong, concrete action
verb, and (most of the time) a direct object. (We won't count articles such as
"a", "an", and "the" as words.) The simpler an
outline is the more it focuses on the important relationships in your story.
Words actually count for more in an outline than in the story. An outline like
I'm proposing should have no more than fifteen to twenty words in it. Twenty
words max for a 400-page novel. In a story, the almost-right word can sometimes
suffice, but in an outline, it has to be the perfect word. Another difference
between this version of an outline and the ones Missus Grundy had you do is
that the statements in her outlines represented topic sentences and as such
specify what comes at the beginning of the section they represent.
That's because in logical writing, the writer states her premise first
and then develops it.
In dramatic stories, however, the
dramatic action that makes your point comes at the end of each section -
where climaxes belong. What this means is that your outline statements
represent endings, not beginnings. This is an important point to keep in mind.
This is ultra-important to grasp. I’ll say it again: Your outline statements represent endings,
not beginnings. I think this is why we hate those old Comp I kinds of
outlines. It doesn’t allow any room for creativity at all. This does.
In almost all novels, there are
three major movements involved as the protagonist struggles to resolve his or
her problem. There are dozens—maybe even hundreds—of smaller movements, but by
and large, there are almost always three major movements or crucial points.
That’s what this kind of outline will show. First, the inciting incident that
kicks off the story. Then, the result
of each of the three major movements. Finally, the resolution. Five statements.
That’s it. The whole of your novel is contained therein. With enormous freedom
within it for those who are afraid their creativity will be stifled…
This is so important to grasping
this that I’m going to belabor it a bit. Each statement represents the result of the major action taken to
resolve the problem. Not the beginning and development of the action.
Major difference and for those that don’t get this, it’s always because they
haven’t shifted their thinking and definition of outlines from those old comp
definitions and models. Again, it represents the outcome of the major action. How you as the author get to that
outcome is totally up to you. It gives you complete creative freedom. Look at
it as the same thing as driving from New York to Los Angeles. You know that’s
your goal. Get to L.A. There are a thousand ways to do that. You might drive
down and go through Arizona. You might go north and go through part of Canada.
You might zig-zag northwest and southwest the whole way. You might go directly
west in a straight line. What’s important is that you end up in L.A., right?
That’s what this kind of outline does. It gives you your outcome (arriving in
L.A.), but it allows you complete freedom in how you get there. I know I keep
repeating this, but I also know from experience how ingrained those godawful
comp I outlines are in our brains, that it’s important that you grasp the
difference.
I'm going to use my own story I
Shoulda Seen a Credit Arranger in my collection titled "Monday's
Meal" to illustrate a typical outline. The first statement will be:
Complication
or inciting incident:
Debt endangers Pete (This is the complication that
provides the occasion for the story. Every story must have an inciting incident
to kick-start it. Something must happen that changes the protagonist's world
and by doing so, creates a problem/goal. This is where stories must begin - not
with setting or backstory. Act I, as it were.)
Development: (This is the second part of the
outline. The development steps that lead to the resolution. Act II, as it were,
following Aristotle's Poetics)
1.Tommy cons Pete into a kidnapping
2. Pete and Tommy botch
kidnapping
3. Pete escapes
Resolution: (This is the third and final
step. Act III.)
Pete pays for mistake
Here’s
the outline without the extraneous material:
Debt endangers Pete.
Tommy cons Pete into a kidnapping
Pete and Tommy botch the
kidnapping
Pete pays for mistake.
I used
this for the 18-page short story that
appeared first in The South Carolina
Review and then I wrote a 92,000 word novel… using the same exact outline.
Worked perfectly for both of them. Oh, yeah. I also wrote a screenplay for this
that was a finalist in both the Writer’s Guild and Best of Austin screenplay
competitons… and guess what? You guessed it. I used the same exact outline and
it worked perfectly. There are major differences in all three versions, but the
central story remained the same and was a practical instrument in all three forms.
It works!
This came to seventeen words, two
over the optimim. If you're under twenty, you're fine. Once I have this
outline, the rest is just filling in the blanks. But, everything in the story
must contribute to the outline. I can't, for instance, start talking about
Pete's childhood in New Orleans, for example. Not unless it contributes to the
situation he's in.
Now. Look at the elements.
There's each of the three things I said should be in the outline. A human noun,
a strong, concrete action verb, and a direct object. I didn't, for instance,
say "Pete is in debt" for my complication. Why? Because is is
a static verb. Always think in straightforward active terms.
You might also notice I didn't
have a happy-sappy "Hollywood" ending. Those don't work in
literature. They work (I guess) in direct-to-video movies (and more than a few
that we see at the theater) and in supermarket novels, but not in quality
fiction, and that's what we're interested in here, I assume.
Doesn't look much like Missus
Grundy's Roman numeral outline, does it? But, if you read the story and then
compare it to the outline, you'll see it's all there. And it allows for you to
roam and be creative within the story. You just have to remain within the
strictures of the outline. But, there's a heck of a lot of freedom there!
Let’s look at just one of those
statements, the first one. Tommy cons
Pete into a kidnapping. In the short story, titled I Shoulda Seen a Credit Arranger, this action took about four
pages. Tommy comes into a bar where Pete’s hustling pool, draws him away from
the huckleberry he’s hustling to another bar, where he lays out the scam, to
kidnap the head of the Cajun Mafia and amputate his hand and hold that for
ransom. That was how I got to the outcome of the outlined point.
Then, in the novel, it took about
80 pages to get to the same point. I had more room with the novel. In the
novel, Pete still has the same problem—in heavy debt to the Mafia for
gambling—and Tommy cons him into the same kidnapping as before. But, this time,
to get to that place, there’s some other developments. First, Tommy talks Pete
into kidnapping a supermarket manager and holding his wife in their home with
Pete guarding her while Tommy and the manager go to his store and clean out his
safe. But, before that, the pair realize they don’t have suits and part of the
supermarket caper is that they have to go into their nice neighborhood and
without suits they’ll stick out. So, because they’re tapped out and neither
have a suit, they decide to pick up operating capital (to buy suits with) by
robbing a streetcar. Which goes horribly wrong. Now, because of a surveillance
camera on the streetcar, their pictures are everywhere on TV and the stakes are
really ratcheted up. Besides escaping the Mob, they now have to worry about the
law. Finally, they do kidnap the head of the Cajun Mafia and remove his hand.
See what I mean about the freedom this kind of outline allows? Enormous
freedom. They still get to the kidnapping, but this time, instead of driving straight
through, they go way down south to Arizona before they wend back up northwest
to L.A. Same outline, same outcome, different way to get there.
In the screenplay, they don’t get
to the kidnapping until about page 45. And, some other things happen there that
didn’t in the short story or novel. But…
they still end up in L.A. Can you see how this kind of outline gives you a
roadmap as well as complete freedom? It really, really does. It’s why when I
see as I did in the recent postings of another forum about people spouting off
about how they hate outlines, I know they’ve never been exposed to this kind.
They’re always thinking about 10-page (or longer!) monstrosities with all those
Roman numerals, describing the beginnings
and travel route to their scene or plot point goals. I agree. Those are
horrible, horrible, mind-numbing and creativity-stifling monsters. This isn’t
at all.
What this kind of outline does is
force you to think through the story before you write it. You spot problems
before you waste two hundred or two thousand (or more) words on them. Suddenly,
writing becomes a breeze. It really does.
In the story above, the
definition of a story is adhered to. A story consists of a character in trouble
- has a need, wants something, etc. A story always begins with the
inciting incident - whatever happens to drastically change the protagonist's
world and create a problem for him or her (it has to be the biggest problem in
his/her life at that point and one the reader will deem worthy enough to follow
him in solving it, reaching his/her goal). Pete's in trouble - he owes a lot of
money to a nasty bookie. He has to do something about it. He does get tricked
by Tommy into an ill-fated kidnapping, but once he's in it, he begins to take
his own action. You can have coincidence in a story, but it should never be a
coincidence that helps the main character. It can appear at first to do
so, but it never really can. It must always hinder the character. And
stories are drama, which means you must create scenes, not wander around inside
the head of the character, and scenes are by definition, action. There
must be dramatic action. Also, a protagonist may be reactive at first, but very
quickly he or she must become proactive, acting on his or her own behalf to
solve the problem, gain the goal, etc. Reactive characters (characters to whom
things "happen" in which they spend their time on stage reacting to
those things) are boring and don't belong in good fiction. And lastly, because
of an action the protagonist takes, there must come a reversal and a
change in the character. What Joyce called an "epiphany". Characters
in fiction, must, as a result of the actions of the story, become profoundly
changed from the person they were at the beginning of the story. Also, the character
can't just think through the problem, although obviously, that can be a part of
his epiphany, but it has to be occasioned by an action that he can then process
internally. The epiphany also cannot be attained through a conversation with
another character. There has to be an actual action which changes him and turns
the story. Once that happens, the story is over. Get out. Start a new story.
But first create an outline for it. You'll thank yourself.
A logical question is: What if I
see a “better” story or way for the character to get from Point A to Point B?
Maybe even an entirely different story? No problem. Just change your outline
and you still have a roadmap that’s easy to follow and one that give you
complete freedom.
The nice thing about this kind of
outline is that you save paper. You can write the whole thing on a napkin or
even a matchbook cover…
Once you've created an outline of
this sort, it's almost impossible to stray in the wrong direction. If you find
yourself doing that, just glance at the outline and get back on the right road.
Blue skies,
Les
And now--here's my new cover!
Ain't it cool?!
8 comments:
This is great. I'm going to try this sort of outline on the crime horror story I'm stuck on today. I'd always hated the idea of outlines too, thinking of the school-type ones.
Let me know how it works for you, CT. Good luck!
First, congratulations on the cover. Having read the book, I think it does a nice job of capturing the mood. Well done.
It's a little eery how closely our outlining methods mesh, though we got there from completely different directions. I used to write up to 30 page "treatments" before I'd start. Over time I have distilled that down to sort statements about each chapter, which I put on index cards and move around to get the order right. (The ideas for what goes on a card may come to me at any time; the sequence doesn't matter at that point.) Once I have the order, I create a Word table with a sentence of short paragraph of what has to happen in that chapter. Not how it has to happen--I'm good coming up with that part as I write--just what has to be accomplished. Sometimes these short notes get ore complex, as ideas for scene come to me and it's not yet time to write that chapter, so I'll add to the "outline" and keep on with where I am. It's relatively easy and simple, and saves me a lot of backtracking and rewriting.
Thanks, Dana. And yeah--great minds and all that! I can't begin to tell you how much I appreciate the blurb you gave Kidnapping, man!
Your outline theory is the best I've seen. Thank you!
By the way, I did have a Miss Grundy for a teacher.(in the land before time)
Thanks, JoAnn. I wish I could take credit for it, but I came across it years ago in a craft book and I wish I could remember the author so I could give him credit!
I can't wait to read it. The cover is awesome. Rock on, buddy. Peace.
1...2...3...testes. Comments work for me.
Post a Comment