Novel Outline

What the Plotter vs. Pantser Debate Gets Wrong

Kia Orion | | 6 min read

A few things that shifted how I think about outlining a novel.

The Plotter vs. Pantser Frame Hides the Real Question

George R.R. Martin famously divided writers into "architects" and "gardeners." Architects draw blueprints before they build. Gardeners plant seeds and see what grows. He put himself firmly in the gardener camp, and writers everywhere latched onto the metaphor because it gave them permission to pick a side.

But here's what I keep coming back to. Martin's gardening approach has produced one of the most famously unfinished series in modern fiction. The Winds of Winter has been pending for over a decade. The plot threads of A Song of Ice and Fire have multiplied to the point where even Martin has acknowledged the difficulty of pulling them together. That doesn't mean gardening is wrong. It means that the question "are you a plotter or a pantser" was never the right question to begin with.

The question worth asking is whether your process is actually serving the story you're trying to write. Or whether you've built an identity around your process and you're protecting that identity even when it's failing you. I've seen writers refuse to outline because they've decided they're pantsers, the same way I've seen people refuse to check a map because they've decided they have a good sense of direction. Sometimes you do. Sometimes you're just lost and committed to the bit.

Pantsers Who Succeed Usually Have a Hidden Map

Diana Gabaldon wrote the first Outlander novel without an outline. She mentions this in interviews and it gets repeated as proof that you don't need one. But the part that gets left out is that she'd been writing that book as practice, with no intention of publishing it, for years before it became the novel people know. She knew her characters the way you know a friend you've had for a decade. She knew the period. She knew the world. She had, in every meaningful sense, already done the work that an outline is supposed to do.

Kazuo Ishiguro does something similar. He writes what he calls a "crash draft," four to six weeks of writing with the door closed, no editing, no rereading, just laying material down as fast as he can. It looks like pantsing from the outside. But before the crash draft, he spends months thinking. Sometimes a year. He walks around with the novel in his head, working out its emotional architecture, its structural turns, its thematic weight. His outline is detailed. He just keeps it inside his skull instead of putting it on paper.

I don't know whether that makes him a plotter or a pantser. I think it makes him a writer who figured out what he needs before he starts drafting, and the label doesn't matter much after that.

The question worth asking isn't which camp you're in. It's whether your process is serving the story you're trying to write.

Free. Every morning. Unsubscribe anytime.

An Outline Relocates Spontaneity, It Doesn’t Eliminate It

The fear writers have about outlining is that it removes the discovery. You'll know what happens before you write it, and the writing will feel dead. I understand the fear.

But what actually happens, at least from what I've seen and what outlining writers describe, is that the discovery moves. It shifts from the drafting stage to the outlining stage. When Brandon Sanderson sits down to outline a Stormlight Archive novel, he's discovering things constantly. He's figuring out what this book is about, what his characters need, where the surprises live. The outline is where the creative thinking happens. The draft is where the sentences happen.

And even then, the outline doesn't survive contact with the draft intact. Sanderson has said that by the time he reaches any given scene, the outline for that scene is usually wrong, because the characters have become real enough to have opinions about what they'd actually do. The outline gave him a direction. The draft corrected it. The spontaneity was there the whole time, just wearing different clothes at different stages.

Think of it like driving somewhere you've never been. The GPS route isn't the trip. You'll still notice things along the way, still pull over for something unexpected, still take a detour because a road looked interesting. The route just keeps you from spending three hours trying to find the highway.

The Outline That Helps Is Usually Smaller Than the One You Made

Most new writers who try outlining make their outlines too detailed. They write paragraph-long summaries of scenes that haven't been drafted yet, and those summaries quietly become constraints instead of guides. By the time they sit down to write chapter seven, they're not writing a novel. They're transcribing a plan. And the plan was made by someone who didn't yet know what the book felt like from the inside.

Donna Tartt took eleven years to write The Goldfinch. Her outline, from what's been reported, was a single long paragraph describing the emotional arc of the novel. That's it. Specific enough to steer by. Loose enough to breathe in. The most useful outlines tend to answer one question per section: what does this part of the book need to accomplish emotionally. Not what happens plot-wise. Just the feeling the reader should carry out of this chapter and into the next.

The Middle of the Novel Tells You Whether Your Outline Was Real

The beginning of a novel is easy to plan because it's about establishing things. Characters, world, premise, tone. You can see all of that before you start writing. The ending is often clearer than you'd expect, because it's the thing you're writing toward, the emotional destination that made you want to write the book in the first place.

The middle is where outlines go to die. The middle is where character decisions compound in ways you didn't predict, where subplots develop weight you didn't plan for, where a secondary character starts demanding more attention than your outline allocated, and where the thing you thought the book was about starts quietly becoming something else. If your outline survives the middle completely intact, you probably over-controlled the story. If it collapses entirely, you probably needed more structure before you started.

Most novels end up somewhere between those two failures. And that's fine. That's what revision is for.


I think about this a lot when it comes to daily writing practice. The hardest thing about sitting down to write every day isn't discipline or time or inspiration. It's being willing to look at the thing you planned and ask whether it's still the thing you should be writing. That takes a kind of honesty that no outline can give you and no amount of pantsing can avoid.

That's what we send writers every morning. One lens to look through before you open the draft.

Get tomorrow's reflection free.

Every morning, before you open the draft, there's a question worth asking. A daily practice keeps you honest enough to ask it.

Free. Every morning. Unsubscribe anytime.

K

Kia Orion

Author of The Writer's Daily Practice, the #1 Bestselling book in Journal Writing and Writing Skills. He writes a free daily reflection for writers.

Keep reading

Stop staring at the blank page. Start writing with purpose.

A free daily reflection delivered to writers every morning. Quotes from literary masters, an original reflection, and a prompt to get you writing.

Join 1,000+ writers. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.