I'm sure we can all join in with the catchphrase: "Failing to plan is ... planning to fail."
It is tossed around school classrooms and lecture theatres any time that there is a big exam or essay due.
It is a commonly accepted notion that if you want to write well, you need to plan what you're going to write.
However, I remember listening to a children's author several years ago who said that, in her writing, she likes to get her characters into situations from which she doesn't know how they are going to get free.
Why?
Because it makes the story more authentic. Neither reader nor writer [for a period] know what is going to happen to the characters and how the problems are going to resolve. The emotions are real; the panic, the tension, the desperation is real. Rather than introducing a character who until now has been hidden, but who can sort everything out, or creating a contrived and neat 'exit clause' ["And then I woke up. It had all been a dream."], the writing seems real, because it is raw.
Is she planning to fail?
I don't think so.
Isn't writing an adventure? A journey? A discovery?
And sometimes planning out a route [no matter how thorough and thoughtful] can restrict your journey or adventure. And it can restrict your writing. What if you have your story all planned out, but another new [better] idea occurs to you whilst you are writing? Do you discard it, as it's not part of the plan, or do you change your plan to accommodate the new thought?
I know some writers who plan meticulously and know exactly what they are going to write before they ever put pen to paper.
But as for me, I prefer to have a general idea and see what happens. I prefer to 'discover' my story as I write it. It makes it seem more real and genuine and exciting. And that is what I look for, as a reader.
To me, planning is planning to fail.
