But You Can’t Write That Fast
Being afflicted with esprit d’escalier I now wish I’d called this “Inconceivable.” Never mind. In these blog posts, written day by day, I don’t have the luxury you have when writing a novel – that of going back. And that’s something to which we’ll return in this post.
So, you’re looking at these posts and going “what do you mean write fast? How fast can one write?”
I once knew a writer who thought that a book every five years was the normal and fair speed and that writing faster than that led to inferior product. This writer, much as it will surprise you, did not have a career.
Most writers working in this field consider a book a year normal and two book a year fast.
Surely, you say, surely, if we write faster than that, then the product will suck.
Well, publishers – and agents – seem to think so. It’s been a source of exasperation to me over the length of my career, to have people look at a book and go “maybe if you’d taken a little more time.”
Worse, as it becomes known that I’m a fast writer, I will get reviews that say “She should have taken more pains over these short stories, and then they would be better.” That was for my first collection. The stories collected in that one took on average three to four months to write. One of the took a year. I don’t know how many more pains they’d want me to take, (truly.)
It always puzzles the living daylight out of me that people think they can tell how long it took me to write a book from how much they like it (or not) or how cohesive it feels or not. And that they inevitable prescribe MORE time to make it better.
I’m here to tell you that some of us are “putter inners.” If we rush a book to the finish, with no time to stop and think about the implications of various things, the book is tight and to the point. But the minute we slow down and start thinking “Well, maybe I need to put in an incident that shows how she really doesn’t like beets…” Even though the beets are a minor plot point. Or “well, we never see him hugging his dog.” Or… Then on revision, we throw all these things in, we end up with pointers in the book that give the reader the impression that the plot was going to be about something it was never meant to be about. “I started reading this book about a beet loving dog, but it was too weird to finish.” While if you’d rushed the book, it would have been obvious it was about a couple who happens to hate beets and love dogs going to the stars.
How fast is fast when you’re rushing?
Well, my fastest-written book – Plain Jane – was written in three days. Mostly because it was work for hire (yes, I know, other people write media tie ins, as work for hire, I write the biography of Tudor queens. Deal) and not under my name. I desperately needed the money, but my mind wasn’t in that space. So I put it off and put it off and put it off until I HAD to do it, and then did it in three days.
I THINK I edited it twice, but by that time I was in a sort of daze, so I can’t promise.
Would I recommend people doing that? Well, no. It was three days of minimal breaks for bathroom and eating, and I think I slept a cumulative four hours. By the end of it, I felt as though I was eighty and I couldn’t think. I had to ask Dan to take me away to Denver for two nights. We went to a hotel where I sat and embroidered, because TV shows were too hard to follow.
However, as an extreme example of my deciding on a plot (in this case a structure, which I made a Cinderella pattern) and running at it, the book did extremely well. This despite a cover SO bad that it’s second only to the hard cover cover of Draw One In The Dark in the annals of sucky covers. It still pays me royalties. So…
Other books that worked well and were written fast, but not as fast, included Draw One In The Dark (two weeks) and Dipped Stripped And Dead (about two weeks.)
In fact, for my money, two weeks are my best writing speed. It takes about ten days to lie down the tracks on the book at 10k words per day, but count in a couple of days when the cats or the kids keep me from working… two weeks. Then I send it out to betas, usually get it back in a week or two, and will then spend three to four days in rewrite, unless it’s involved, when it takes two weeks.
THAT is ideal. And now I hear you thinking “But Sarah… why don’t you write twelve books a year, then?”
Well, I write more than anyone knows about, let’s put it that way – there are pen names you’ll never get out of me, not even by breaking me at the wheel – but no, I’ve never written 12 – or even 8 – books in a year. So, why not?
Because I allow myself long silences in between. I lose track of that discipline and habit of sitting at my desk and working. Because I’ll be in the middle of a book and will get an editorial letter, and then it all goes by the wayside because I have to shift gears into the PREVIOUS book again. Because I too, to an extent, interiorized the myths of “slow is better” and I keep braking and going “What if I’m doing something horribly wrong.”
But the sad part about that is that, no, I can’t be. There have always been writers – though Rex Stout is the only one I can think of right now – who wrote really fast. As in, they locked themselves in a shed for five days and emerged with a book. And most of the pulp writers wrote six, seven novels a year.
Right now you’re saying “Yeah, but look at the pulp novels.”
No. Think about the general quality of writing in the field in those days. How fast or how slow you wrote had nothing to do with anything. It’s like my collection of my earliest stories. You can think they’re the way they are (and I confess some of them are rather two-dimensional) because I didn’t take enough time over them. In fact, they’re the way they are because I was learning my craft.
I think there are a lot more authors writing much faster today than they admit to, because of publisher prejudice against fast writing. For instance, almost every author I know who writes only one book a year has a deep, unhealthy relationship with computer games.
At one time, when I was looking for a new agent, the A-lister I interviewed told me that if I wanted to be “big league” I should write only a book every two years. That this wasn’t because he thought my entire time should be occupied with that precious book was betrayed by the fact he advised me to get a college-teaching position. (Which WOULD slow me down to a book every two years. The papers. The bureaucracy. The boredom.)
But that model is passing from the world. There is no reason for a writer not to write as much as he wishes to. In fact, if he is still also working traditional and is afraid of being snubbed, he can (and should) use secret pen names.
So… What holds you back?
In the spirit of confession, and knowing I’m not as fast as I could be, I’m going to give myself my own prescription for speeding up:
1 – Stop being afraid to. Believe – truly believe – how fast you write has nothing to do with how good you are. Sure, some people are faster than others, but how do you know what your fast-limit is if you don’t test it?
2 – Stop stopping in the middle of a short story or a book. Once you lose it, it’s much harder to get back to it.
3 – Don’t go over a book more than twice for rewrite. Three times if you REALLY think something is seriously wrong. After that you’re adding static and losing the signal.
4 – Let yourself go. It doesn’t have to be good, it has to be finished. If you allow your internal critic to talk, it will be neither.
5 – Let the words look after the words. Words are the easiest revision and it’s why G-d gave us copyeditors (instead of as a sick joke, as every author has suspected on occasion.)
Now, ready, set, write.
My favorite story so far was 11,000 words in three days. If I could stick to that pace, I could do a short novel in two weeks. The day job won’t allow that, of course; but if I could just stick to that pace in my off hours, I ought to get a short novel per month. But I’m not close to that. It’s all fits and spurts right now.
One thing that slows me down is research. I know some people say ignore research, just put something down and get it right later; but sometimes research changes the very shape of the story. In my latest story, I had it stuck in my head that the Federal government (FBI or maybe FAA) had jurisdiction over all airports. My story involves a murder at a small airport, and a federal investigation there would radically change the shape of the story. The federal agents would know too many secrets. But my research last night revealed that the local police have jurisdiction for law enforecement matters (anything outside of TSA, and also to assist TSA). The local police in my story would be mostly unaware of the secrets. Federal investigators who know there are secrets were messing up my plot. Local police without a clue won’t mess things up that way.
LikeLike
What I do is advance research, for that sort of nugget and to “set the shape” of the story. Then — because it’s hard to know what you’ll need SPECIFICALLY in tiny detail, and that’s where I can research for months — write the story and any location/date/specific you don’t know, put in “Look up” usually with some outrageous thing like an ampersand that will help find it in search and replace. (Because I and everyone else I know has had at least ONE of those “look up” or “find name” or “Name later” come out in a published story.
LikeLike
Scott Card tends to write as you do — long pondering followed by mad fits of 16 hour days. It seems to work out.
My experience is that the slow stolid shitabrick writing is the bad stuff. When I write something in a passion or a fury, and send it off saying “Golly, this is a rant that came to me”, it’s often the stuff that turns out to be most popular.
LikeLike
My first professional sale, 1400 words or so, took an hour, max. When I submitted it, I realized it really needed a twist at the end, add five more minutes.
Now, mind you, inspiration doesn’t come when called, but when it hits . . . Whee! Supersonic typing.
LikeLike
And, yes, I did work today before I allowed myself a facebook/MGC/blog crawl break.
LikeLike
Famous fast writers:
Georges Simenon could crank out an Inspector Maigret novel in 5 days. Erle Stanley Garners was a complete slouch, taking 2 weeks for a Perry Mason. Meanwhile, L. Ron Hubbard had a reputation for writing faster than many people could type. And Shakespeare produced around 2 plays a year at his peak.
LikeLike
Two authors came to mind when I read this, Louis L’amour who not only was very prolific but wether they like him or hate him (and many people demean him) I don’t know of an author that wouldn’t love to have his booksales (and yes Bantam pushing his books had a lot to do with his sales, but people don’t buy over a hundred books by one author just because the publisher has a good advertising scheme).
The other author I thought of immediately was Robert Ludlum, because many of his books were originally published under another pen name, because at that time publishers didn’t think you could be a toplist author and write more than one quality novel a year. So to avoid the stigma that fast writing carried he wrote one book a year under his name, and any others that he wrote during that year he submitted and published under another name.
LikeLike
Shakespeare was limited by having to teach his plays to actors. That’ll really slow you down. Walter Gibson, primary author of The Shadow, famously used three typewriters because, after the first one overheated he would be on the third before it had cooled down enough to use again.
Submitted without further comment…
LikeLike
VERY good advice, but as always, the devil is in the details.
LikeLike
I really *liked* “Draw One in the Dark.” If that’s what comes out when you write that quickly, I suggest you do more of it.
As for me, the most I have ever managed is four books in one year. Not as impressive as it sounds, as the books are between 17,000 to 25,000 words. (Although I do have to provide 40-50 internal illustrations and artist’s instructions on 7 plates for each book.)
On the other hand, I managed that working a day job full time. (Some people play golf — I write. But I get paid what the golfers spend, and my wife knows where I am on weekends and evenings.)
And I swore never again — at least until I retire.
LikeLike
Mark,
That one was a complete pantser effort too. When Tom dies, I was COMPLETELY confused. “But… but… but… it’s a SERIES.”
LikeLike
Er… I should point out First Blood is totally unedited. It’s been edited since, but I can’t figure out where the file is, other than with the editor…
LikeLike