Separating the acts of Story Creation and Story Telling

Many writers dismiss the notion that a story can or should be thought out and outlined beforehand. They believe the act of writing is spontaneous, and premeditation only limits the creative possibilities of a story. Writers who get into this line of thought are confusing two important and distinct parts of writing. Story Creation and Story Telling.

When we come up with a plot, characters, and a scene, we are creating a story. When we put that story down on paper in order to relay it to others, we're telling a story. Both are important, unique processes, and often times writers get them confused as one process. They believe that the only way to create a story is to sit down and write and figure it out as you go. Introduce characters as needed, see what sort of conflict they get into, and keep writing until the plot resolves itself. So what's the problem? Isn't it just killing two birds with one stone? Kind of. The problem is the end result. You never really focused specifically on creating your story, and without a complete story at hand, how well could you possibly have told it? What you're left with is one rough version of something that should have been two separate pieces. You have your story, and its been told, but the two could not compliment each other having been created on the fly. When we tell a story without a clear idea of direction, we do things counterproductive to telling an enthralling story. We ramble, we take wild tangents that don't go anywhere, and we repeat ourselves frequently. Worst of all, by the time we reach the end, we may find that the conclusion we've reached isn't really the end to the story we began.This is why its important to keep the actions distinct.

Consider this: A man tells an amusing joke to a room full of people. They find the anecdote quite comical, causing many in the room to laugh out loud. Later on in the evening, a member of the original group tries to retell the same joke to a different group of people. However, the story is not met favorably. No one laughs, many people do not understand it. What went wrong? It was the same story, wasn't it? So why the vast difference in reactions?

It's all in the telling. Any number of things could have gone wrong the second time around. The scene wasn't properly set, important details may have been left out, too many unnecessary details were added in, making the story drag on. In the end it could have just been a matter of an improperly timed punchline.

Its important to not only have your story prepared, but to know the best way to tell it. The two actions are separate art forms, and its important that a writer remembers its OK to keep them separated.