How to Plot and Write a Novel

As a professional writer I will tell you what this method really does. It produces crap novels that are completely formulaic and predictable by the lowest common denominator in the readership market. This is a method preferred by second rate hacks whose works are as uninteresting as they are on a personal level.

For a character-driven novel, I agree. I don’t think this method would ever develop a literary masterpiece. However, for writers who like to begin with a plot (which is an equally legitimate way to develop a story), it depends totally on how much time and “what-ifs” the writer allows himself.

If someone hurries through the steps, they’ll get a storyline made up of whatever comes to mind easiest—very formulaic, as you say. But if they let it simmer in their minds, trying out different ideas mentally (or in writing) to see where they go, they can create a story just as interesting as one created without a plan. The key is to spend the time and not take the first plot turn that you think of.

For writers who like to outline their novel, the Snowflake method will serve them well. For writers who like to explore where a story might take them, it wouldn’t. And even those who use the method are well-advised to let the story shift and change throughout the process, which is the whole point—it’s changing before you’ve written 300 pages, not after.

Great article and a useful way to organize the disparate elements of a potential novel.

The first comment is interesting. These methods do not need to be followed blindly. If it happens to work for me then I'm not sure why he/she has a problem. I don't think it makes me a second rate hack or uninteresting on a personal level (I don't think I know you do I?)! Lighten up!

I guess this is very helpful. After reading this, I realize some of my mistakes in writing a novel.

I don't agree with the writer who claims this will necessarily churn out formulaic novels. i have an aversion to novel formulae, but this structure is different because it allows for so much variation. A great deal of the structural development focuses on the characters, not the plot. It is the antithesis of a plot driven formula. If you read the original version Ingermanson suggests constantly revisiting and recrafting the plot in light of character development.
His process fascinates me because it is the only formula I've ever discovered for writing a book which is organic, more creative than formulaic. I find it produces resonance, telling detail and demands that characters act for a reason not because the plot demands they do. The snowflake method is infinitely varied and can produce very subtle work. But it's only as good as the authors who use it.

Jennifer, do you know of a similar method that works backwards? I have characters planned out well in my head, and I think I know how things end, but I'm missing most of the plot.

Wow, I think the first poster has some anger issues to work out. Good luck with that.

This method does not produce "formulaic" novels. Further, I'd go so far as to argue that methods such as these (www.10StepsToYourFirstDraft.com is another, for example) are a wonderful tool for creating character-driven novels, particularly for newish writers who are interested in writing novel length works but don't know where to begin.

Remember that most people don't like to write or read "literature" and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Good writing is good writing no matter what the genre or how it was created. Getting all snobby about how to write a novel just isn't that helpful.

I take the first comment as a personal challenge.

A good, experienced writer has almost certainly developed their own methods and doesn't need this one, so we shouldn't expect to see it produce good work, regardless of what it's worth. But why expect formulaic novels and plot-driven action? The plot is reduced to one short sentence whereas the method encourages world-building and character development. Ideas for characters will pop out of simple questions such as "What must character X be like in order to do Y?", and everything that didn't fit in the original one-sentence plot will grow from these characters. How could it not be character-driven?

The method doesn't specify anything about style, themes or symbols. That's not a weakness! It doesn't prevent you from adding them in, as opposed to letting the setting and characters write your story, which is great against writer's block but neglects everything besides action. And avoiding formulaic novels is incredibly easy, with any method; just notice when you're imitating rather than innovating.

1) What's the difference between a "snowflake" and a Mind Map? I can't spot it. I know it works well, because I used a mind map to plan an article that won me a national award. Just curious if I'm missing something
2) You used the word "distill" near the beginning when you meant "instill." "Distill" means to separate out: a moonshiner distills juice etc. to separate the alcohol from the other part of the liquid. A common mistake, but still a mistake

I think it is a very good article. I am using "the snowflake" method to structure my first novel. I purchased "Writing Fiction for Dummies" as I had a couple of idea's for stories and I've wanted to be an author for awhile now. The book is immensely helpful for new and aspiring writers. As far as creating formulaic fiction goes, what a load of horse manure! Are you telling me that everyone who uses this method will create stories that are similar? I think not. My story idea, is mine and it won't be the same as yours even if it's in the same genre and sub-genre. My characters will also be very different. Even if our ideas are amazingly similar, my style and yours will be different. How naive are you to suggest that a method for adding structure to a story will result in formulaic stories. What they will create, I believe, is well structured, marketable, character driven fiction.

Very helpful! I love to write and am working on a novel about a 9 year old girl living during the Revolutionary War. I am going to use this method to write my novel! I am excited and looking forward to the journey ahead!

I think this article was very helpful and insightful. Also, she did not mean "instill". Why would you "instill" a rambling story? "Instill" it in whom? She mean distill, which defined exactly as you said. She means separate the real story from all the "crap" (usually not-so-important story details) that usually comes along with it.

Thanks for this great article Jennifer. Are you goung to read my novel when I'm through?! haha

This sounds like a how-to for formula fiction. I think there are enough James Pattersons in the world without giving out tips on how to become the next crap-shoot bestseller.

It appears to me that the first commenter neither feels that writers are smart enough to use the system as a guideline instead of law nor have they read the Rivan Codex.

As far as I know, David and Leigh Eddings don't technically use the Snowflake method for their writing, but the Rivan Codex suggests that a similar form of organizing characters and plot points was used at least for some of their works.

Fact is, you can freeform and revise a lot, or you can organize and formulate. All options in between are just as valid.

This may help those having trouble getting started, at the very least.

Wow, I think I learned just as much about writing from reading the comments as I did reading the method. The comments are great examples of what can distract a reader from the subject of a text and that the ambition of a novelist has the potential of ruining chances to grow by attempting a technique that may at first seem oversimplified. Inspiration can come from anywhere.

P.S. Distill has multiple definitions one of which is to extract the essential elements of; refine; abstract: She managed to distill her ideas into one succinct article (or in this case sentence).

There are many things I would like to say and or point out.

BEFORE I DO I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO NEVER READ PAST THAT FIRST POST SAYING THE SYSTEM WAS BAD. I would request that you put that comment further down the list. There are responses that seem much more helpfull (at least to me/in my humble opinion).

First, this article is wonderfull for what it is. Imagine you have a rather complex story with lots of characters and want to have some way to easily reference all the who's what's where's etc... I can't think of a better way to organize all that then this method. Yes, I am sure there are other methods that use a set and subset pattern to get the same result. This seems to take basic character creation plot outlining and event sequence for reference past the usual archive level (kinda what I figure anyone who writes a series of novels would have to go through) to the point where it as a process can be used to develope a project as a whole.
No where in the entire article does it state what element(s) of structure are more important than others. Mileu, Characterization, Idea or Event, depending on the point of the work in question each of these are going to be represented by a percentage of the whole. Maybe 40 percent character and the other 60 ballanced through the other 3 (as an example).

This method seems like a wonderfull way to organise character bibles, create story lines and keep everything in order (for easy reference).

In the end whatever tells your story is whats best. I can think of plenty of award winning novels and movies that had little character development but a wonderfully complex world or were based on a series of rules for how that world worked.

A perfect example of this would be the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings Series. Other than knowing the Dwarves names very little is added for them in the Hobbit. Meanwhile, by the time you get to The Return of the King, it is completely understood why the ring is bad and what it does. Even the main characters of Frodo and Sam grow only slightly throughout the series.
I believe Tolkein's books are a great example of how a major series of books can be structured according to something other than character development. In this case it would be the destruction of the one ring or it's capture while the forces of Sauron attempt to wipe out the good people of middle earth. Originally the main characters background stories were relegated to appendices and brief descriptions throughout other situations within the main story.

Another thing I would like to point out is that most books aren't anywhere as long as you might think. Most people look at a book and think they could never create a story anywhere that long, the task seems to daunting.

If you want a formula here's another one:

the average paperback novel is 4 by 6 inches and less than 400 pages long.
the average piece of paper you would write on for an essay is 8.5 by 11 inches
or twice the size of a novel page.
this means that for every page you type in a word processer you get at least two novel pages
this doesn't include pages that have little more than dialogue.
what this means is that instead of having to write 400 pages for a story, in reality it's more like 150 to 200 max.
now lets break that down even further.... if each chapter can be defined as a major situation within the narative as a whole and there are usually about 20 chapters in a book this would mean you would only have to write10 pages per chapter novel sized (at 8.5 by 11 it would be half of that or 5 pages typed) say in essay form telling each mini story in the sequence combine them all and you have a novel
with only 2 characters (a protagonist and antagonist) telling each situation would mean writing about 2.5 pages each character per chapter. Think bite sized peices rather than eating the whole thing at once!

Imagine using the snowflake method structuring your story to the point where each chapter becomes an assignment of it's own and knowing all you have to do is write a series of situations all structured around a central story. If each assignment only needed to be about 10 pages long thats a much easier goal rather than saying "oh my god, I've got a story but what if it's not complex enough or long enough or whatever...".
Yes this is a horible way to write a book! The point I am trying to make is that the project as a whole isn't anywhere near as massive or impossible as you might think.

Very long story made short 20 assignments each 5 pages in length. Then read through as a first draft and you should be well on your way:)

I would say try setting smaller more reasonable goals so that when you are at the point in the process where you are working on individual chapters you can work with a more freeform. See what happens to the characters that inspired you to work through the rest of the process telling the story this way and your book will be better for it

as I said in the beginning.....IN MY HUMBLE OPINION!

Seems good to me. First poster needs to sit down with a drink.

I like this article. Thanks very much, it has given me alot to think about :)

I found the comments very interesting aswell. I think the first comment was very surprising and I would not expect a professional writer to be so negative, and in fact, I would expect a professional writer to understand that everyone writes in their own way.

Thank you for all the people who left positive constructive feedback, they were as enjoyable to read as the article :)

This is a really great organzing tool, and I think it just really helps you get to know you own story better.
I think alot of aspiring authors don't have their characters quite developed enough- and the character's actions don't always stay true to their personality, but rather make decisions according to the author's personality. Its true that many writers base their main characters after themselves, but I've seen this happen with more than the main character.

The snowflake method has alot of character base, and I think its a good exercise to cement your character in your head.

And really, the organizing is just fantastic. I need more organization than a notebook full of scattered notes.

I think that it is very helpful, if you want more detail, go to Randy Ingermanson's website

I am also a writer, and I can tell you that the amount of creativity this method allows for is not that great. Its good for pitching an idea you already having! Bringing things together, but as a starting point, I would avoid it if I could. This is how movie ideas are pitched in Hollywood. They are not exactly setting a good pace for decent plot.

If you are a writer, you know best what you are trying to write, and you know best how to get there. Go with the flow, study other authors. You can edit your material endlessly thanks to computer. If you are struggling, I would say a mind-map or simple plot-line chart would be more effective.

Fopr the first person to comment I must ask, what professional writing have you done because if you are such a professional, then why did you feel the need to mingle with us: " crappy writers?"