There's a difference between the craft end of this discussion and the analysis end of the discussion.
On a craft basis, I would totally agree with you; each writer has to do what they have to do to get the story down. If outlining kills the story, don't do it. Write organically, then spend the time afterwards to pull the story together and make it cohesive.
In analysis, though, it's pretty clear that the organic/pantser method doesn't aid Martin and Jordan's storytelling. They get lost in the subplots and characterizations and such in the first draft. That's all fine for a first draft, but then they don't take the weedwhacker to it. They let the sprawl happen instead of tightening it down. They don't take the time during revision to hone the story, and it shows.
Erikson, on the other hand, does take the time to focus everything into one interconnected story. While his prose is incredibly thick in the first five books, he does get better at writing clear prose. But every sentence is loaded, and everything points back to character, plot, or theme of what's happening in either the book or the series.
In the end, it's not the drafting stage I am pointing out; it's the revision, or lack thereof, that makes or breaks an organic writer. Obviously what Martin and Jordan is writing/has written works for a lot of people. But they're also highly complained about. Erikson, which has many of the same hallmarks, isn't. Neither is David Weber.
Michelle West has gotten some flack on her Sun Sword series, and she's constantly complaining that she has a hard time judging how many words/books it will take for her to get through her stories, but when I look over that series in particular, I see that even with the high POV amounts, she still stays focused on the central story, this story of trying to prevent demons from taking over the southern country. But in her latest series, she's on focus. She's also mostly an organic writer, if I understand what she's said.
So yes, as craft, write how you have to. Your readers won't care how you get there. But the story on the page will be evaluated right up against everyone else's, and if it doesn't come up to par, that will be noted. Calling technique into question is part of that evaluation, in my experience.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
yati
no subject
Date: 2013-02-27 06:04 am (UTC)On a craft basis, I would totally agree with you; each writer has to do what they have to do to get the story down. If outlining kills the story, don't do it. Write organically, then spend the time afterwards to pull the story together and make it cohesive.
In analysis, though, it's pretty clear that the organic/pantser method doesn't aid Martin and Jordan's storytelling. They get lost in the subplots and characterizations and such in the first draft. That's all fine for a first draft, but then they don't take the weedwhacker to it. They let the sprawl happen instead of tightening it down. They don't take the time during revision to hone the story, and it shows.
Erikson, on the other hand, does take the time to focus everything into one interconnected story. While his prose is incredibly thick in the first five books, he does get better at writing clear prose. But every sentence is loaded, and everything points back to character, plot, or theme of what's happening in either the book or the series.
In the end, it's not the drafting stage I am pointing out; it's the revision, or lack thereof, that makes or breaks an organic writer. Obviously what Martin and Jordan is writing/has written works for a lot of people. But they're also highly complained about. Erikson, which has many of the same hallmarks, isn't. Neither is David Weber.
Michelle West has gotten some flack on her Sun Sword series, and she's constantly complaining that she has a hard time judging how many words/books it will take for her to get through her stories, but when I look over that series in particular, I see that even with the high POV amounts, she still stays focused on the central story, this story of trying to prevent demons from taking over the southern country. But in her latest series, she's on focus. She's also mostly an organic writer, if I understand what she's said.
So yes, as craft, write how you have to. Your readers won't care how you get there. But the story on the page will be evaluated right up against everyone else's, and if it doesn't come up to par, that will be noted. Calling technique into question is part of that evaluation, in my experience.