One of the authors I follow on Facebook posted this quote from Neil Gaiman today, regarding first drafts:
"Write down everything that happens in the story, then in the second draft, make it look like you knew what you were doing all along."
It's one of a host of quotes and memes that speak to how we as writers should treat the first draft or our work-in-progress. To some, it's an almost stream-of-consciousness dashing out of ideas, sometimes according to an outline, sometimes not. The point here is to get the raw material out onto the workbench, to construct mock-ups and prototypes, most or all of which will be discarded later in favor of the real product.
To others, myself included, we want to see recognizable prose as our story takes shape. Not final, polished prose, of course not. We expect to iterate many times, improving as we go, before we submit our work to a professional editor (if we can afford one.) But we set a higher bar for what we share with our critique partners and, if we're honest, for the state in which we're willing to leave a scene before moving on to the next one.
Both approaches - and of course there's a continuum, not a binary choice - have their pros and cons. It's another dimension to writing style, much like the plotter vs pantser vs plantser debate. I prefer to produce a first draft closer to a final one, although I risk becoming invested in material that needs radical change or excision from the narrative. I do, however, try not to obsess over every word choice, or to descend too deep down the rabbit holes of research. It's a balance that I revisit constantly.
For other writers out there: what works best for you?
Comments