1,700 words per hour works out at 28.3 words per minute, which is totally possible.

Terry

While still forcing the quality? Nora!

Well, I think that a lot of quality can be produced when it's forced, or rather when the writer's forced to get his preventions, inhibitions and excuses out of the way to reach for it. Just one example: US sitcom writing is the best in the world (at least in its good sitcoms), and often the work is produced under pressure. The writers, and sometimes the actors too, push each other to come up with funnier lines, even right up to and including filming. Neil Simon also often used to work that way: taking a play on the road that still needed a lot of work, then using the pressure of audiences, looming critic reviews, demanding actors, etc, to force better writing out of himself. Of course, it's harder for a novelist to push himself, and the distractions are much more potent when there's no one else to resist them with, but it can be done.

Terry

I was averaging 2,000 words a day the other week, before the kids' summer holidays started. Then it really was impossible to write anything near that - or anything at all some days. 2,000 words an hour is possible, but probably not 2,000 words every hour!

You do get into a zone where the writing comes fluidly. Breaks tend to be very disruptive though, and you feel yourself having to start again. And it's hard to pick it up.

That's what I've found anyway...

I think my best in a day was 5000 words written in about 3 chunks - two and a half scenes - but they still needed work. A 5000 word long scene would probably be too long for comfort for the reader.
Like any good piece of DIY, I guess it really depends on good preparation prior to writing - if you've got your scenes/chapters already outlined, your characters set up and ready to go, and you know the outcome you want from it, then purely racking up the words shouldn't be too much of a problem - execpt that, with any intensive bout of DIY, you'll probably end up with aching muscles at the end of the day.



- NaomiM

I agree totally with Roger. Once I'm 'zoned in' I can produce a few thousand words in a hour or two. BUT I can't keep this kind of productivity going. There will be times when, in the midst of writing something, I need to sit quietly and think things through. And plenty of other times when I'm searching for just the right word and cannot move on until I've got it, or my writing might just naturally tick along at a slower pace on some days. Personally I think editing and re-editing are essential. You don't have to change things, but when you read back through your work with a fresh eye, often you find that you want to, that you can improve upon things. Sometimes the 'bare bones' approach works, and sometimes it doesn't. I guess it's just knowing which particular approach to take on any given day.

Yup, I can't see a human keeping it up for long. Why would they need to anyway?


- NaomiM

I think you're setting a cracking pace there, Terry. But it makes me think I should go for upping my tempo.

If I write slowly, the first draft is not great, so I might as well write faster and get onto the part I enjoy – rewriting and playing with the narrative.

Thanks for cracking the whip!

I'm probably a little unusual in that I'd actually pay to have someone cracking the whip behind me (stop sniggering at the back, Colin) while I write. There is this strange belief in some writers that what they do is exempt from what works for just about every other form of creativity, which is to make sure you get constant, incisive feed-back. Better still, to get regular coaching and mentoring. Gathering a few basic critiques from other writers is not really good enough. Mainly this is because the etiquette that tends to prevail is determined along the lines of "I won't give you too much hard work to do as long as you don't give me any either."

The fact is, we're all lazy and always underestimate what we can achieve. So, when we set our own obstacle courses - which is what writers do in effect - we tend to make sure the barbed wire fence is only 18 inches high, and the mud in the drop pool is not too deep or too cold, and the pack we have to carry is only ten pounds in weight because, after all, we don't want to risk back strain in later life, do we?

We also convince ourselves that we must spend long periods lying on the sofa, giving inspiration the chance to tickle our creative fancies (which my partner cruelly insists on calling 'taking a kip', when just about every other field of the arts recognises that the best way to produce new work is to get working.

All of which, I believe, makes us reluctant to explore possibilities. For example, a friend read a story of mine the other day, one that's already been sold to a SF magazine but which will need a bit of editing before it's published. This friend is a business coach and is used to finding lots of different ways of getting the best out of his clients. So, while he said he really liked the story, he also gave me several ideas for how it could go. He wasn't being critical - just reacting to what he'd read. I found myself a little reluctant to take on board what he was saying, but then realised it was just that traditional writer's laziness - "Hey! This could mean more work . . . "

Terry

<Added>

Don't know where that damn smiley came from - taking a kip, sorry, waiting for inspiration to stir one's creative loins, is no laughing matter.