a book in 9 days

[crich70]

I was wondering if anyone here at MR thinks it might be possible to write a book length fiction story in 9 days. One day to brainstorm the novel and write up both a outline and character sketches and Eight days to write the actual 1st draft of a 50k word novel.

[pdurrant]

I'm sure it's physically possible (50,000 words over 8 8-hour days is 13 words per minute). Whether the result would be worth reading is another matter!

[crich70]

Well that would be just the 1st draft certainly. Books aren't written they are re-written. I was thinking of trying for 8 five hour days with each 5 hr block split into two 2.5 hour blocks. And I imagine it would get easier with repitition. Walter Gibson wrote his books about The Shadow back in the 30's onward in one or two week blocks. Two book length adventures a month.

[gmw]

Certainly it's possible. Michael Moorcock is one I know of (the following taken from Wikipedia):

Most of Moorcock's earlier work consisted of short stories and relatively brief novels: he has mentioned that "I could write 15,000 words a day and gave myself three days a volume. That's how, for instance, the Hawkmoon books were written."

Some of his novels are very good. Some I don't like much (they seem as rushed as the above sounds).

My guess is that it's probably only viable for an experienced writer, and only for books with a fairly narrow set of objectives (thriller/action pieces). And working within an already created framework (subsequent books a series etc.) would obviously help a lot.

[Dr. Drib]

I think a trained monkey author could do it without any problem.

Well-known Sci-Fi monkey writer named Harlan Ellison once wrote 6 stories in 6 days, while sitting in a bookstore window to help promote the bookstore. I don't know which stories they were or the total word count.

I think any monkey writer could write one, especially if the writer is an Indy writer.

[crich70]

Probably the ability to not stress over things while working helps in writing so much so quickly I imagine.

[cromag]

The faster I write the more time I spend reviewing, editing, rewriting, etc.

I'm sure there's an ideal equilibrium point, but I'm inclined to think I need to spend more time up front.

All kidding aside, there's a wide variation in speed (and efficiency) from writer to writer. I'm definitely on the "more time up front" end of things.

[crich70]

I imagine that t also helps to plan in detail before starting too. That is plotters can write faste rthan pantsers. I bought the other two of three books by Steve Windsor today. He wrote 3 books on writing a book in 9 days. Book 1 is on outlining book 2 is about the writing process and book 3 is about editing what you have written.

[Pulpmeister]

Erle Stanley Gardner used to take about 3 days for a Perry Mason novel, once he had discovered that if his legal secretary could take down his own court case notes for him, surely she could take down a novel if he dictated it on the fly. It worked. 73 Perry Masons later... All short, it must be said: 45,000 to 50,000 words, about the size of a Maigret book.

I doubt he ever outlined; most of his books had a key issue, which Mason unravelled at the end, and the rest of the book, rushing around, conflicts with Tragg and D A Burger, led up to that key issue. I seem to recall his editing process was a quick read through to spot any glaring errors.

Prolific authors rarely outline. Asimov never did.

[crich70]

Asimov was an exceptional writer. Of course he spent a few yrs writing before he made his first saie too I think. And he had John Campbell to guide him as well. I didn't know about Erle Stanley Gardner writing his Perry Mason books in around 3 days time. Interesting. I found by doing the math that if a person writes 5 pages an hour (1,250 words) and writes for 5 hrs a day (25 pages a day) that at the end of 8 days they could have written 50k. The 1st day of the 9 would be for working out a basic outline and character sketches, and the other 8 would be the actual 1st draft writing. Of course that means having the rear planted firmly in the desk chair for several hours daily too. Certainly it should be possible to do that though if the 5 hrs are split into two periods (to give the writer time to stretch and release stress).

[gmw]

crich70, my initial reaction to your post was: "What's this 5 hours a day business?" I regularly spend 10 to 16 hours a day in front of this ... keyboard and screen (I was going to phrase that differently, but I think this is supposed to be a family-friendly forum. )

But, of course, all that time is not productive time. I guess 5 hours is not an unreasonable guess at actual writing time that might happen in a much longer day.

On further reflection, if I was writing full time, and if I really planned to try and write a novel in 9 days, then I think I would lay out my day rather differently. The phone would go. I'd disconnect the Internet. And I'd probably arrange a sign for the door: "Unless there's a fire, I don't want to know about it!" Do all that and yes, I think a novel in that time might be possible even for someone like me. Not every 9 days, but in the right circumstances it could happen.

Of course, as cromag suggested, writing the first draft with that sort of time constraint would probably mean having even more work than usual to do on the second. At this point another quote from that Wikipedia article about Michael Moorcock seems relevant to add:

Moorcock is prone to revising his existing work, with the result that different editions of a given book may contain significant variations.

Which makes you wonder whether maybe he should have allowed another day or two for thinking and revision time.

[Nabeel]

On balance, I don't think it's possible. I think once I wrote 5,000 words in one day: that's my record.

There are two problems:

a. writing at this intensity for nine days in a row would be absolutely exhausting

b. it leaves out the essential 'mulling over' time. As you write, your ideas change. The stuff you write on the third day makes you want to re-think (sometimes radically) what you wrote on the first day, and so on.

In practice, even with a very well designed plan, I think nearly everyone would want to re-think after a few days of writing substantial chunks.

And, anyway, isn't it meant to be fun? Not industrial production.

[crich70]

I grant you not everyone is likely to write that fast. And certainly not for five hrs straight. Splitting it into chunks so a person had some time to unwind would probably be necessary too. I do think that doing 1,250 words in an hour is possible though. And it's a minimum of 1,667 words a day that gets a book written in 30 days during NaNoWriMo so why not 25 pages in a day (with sufficient planning ahead of time)? A rough outline that gives general direction without restricting creativity might allow for such I think. I'm thinking of trying to do it using the books that Steve Windsor has for sale over at Amazon as guides. I figure even if I fail the effort will teach me something about the process.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Nabeel

[...]
And, anyway, isn't it meant to be fun? Not industrial production.

There seem to be a lot of people who actually have fun with such exercises - which I'm assuming is the explanation for NaNoWriMo and so on.

Even if I didn't have my other time constraints, writing to such deadlines is not something that appeals to me. ... But then, only other people have idiosyncrasies, in ourselves such things are perfectly normal behaviour, thank you very much.

[KileJ]

If Bob Ross can create a happy little world in half-an-hour, then I think a nine-day novel seems downright lazy.

Of course, Bob claimed to have painted more than twenty-five thousand such worlds. And he had his director tapping her wristwatch just off camera.

Personally, I grind away whole days in the pursuit of a single perfect paragraph. I can't imagine producing even a first draft in anything under three months. NaNoWriMo has always baffled me.