Should a story be outlined before it is written, or written first? What do Aristotle, Baker, Archer, Phillips, Esenwein and Leeds and Lutz each say (with evidence ids)?
Concordance (code_derived_inference). Five of the eight authors record an outline-first order in some form: Aristotle (sketch the general outline, then names, then episodes), Baker (scenario before dialogue, kept flexible; some dramatists never outline), Phillips (choose the climax first, then cause and effect), Esenwein and Leeds (rough synopsis, then continuity, final synopsis last) and Lutz (a skeleton scenario first, details not fixed). Archer is the cautious voice: action, character and dialogue are interdependent, so a fixed scenario is an unfavourable sign and room should be left for unexpected developments; he reports playwrights who differ. No assigned source recommends writing without any plan. The word 'scenario' means a play outline in Baker but only the scene-by-scene continuity in Esenwein and Leeds. Munsterberg has no record; Forster is a scoped silence on the word outline.
Structured fields
{
"citations": [
{
"url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1974/pg1974.txt",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/36580/pg36580.txt",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/10865/pg10865.txt",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/70937/pg70937.txt",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17903/pg17903.txt",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/73455/pg73455.txt",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/70492/pg70492.txt",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
}
]
}Evidence claims
- [inference] Concordance (code_derived_inference). Five of the eight authors record an outline-first order in some form: Aristotle (sketch the general outline, then names, then episodes), Baker (scenario before dialogue, kept flexible; some dramatists never outline), Phillips (choose the climax first, then cause and effect), Esenwein and Leeds (rough synopsis, then continuity, final synopsis last) and Lutz (a skeleton scenario first, details not fixed). Archer is the cautious voice: action, character and dialogue are interdependent, so a fixed scenario is an unfavourable sign and room should be left for unexpected developments; he reports playwrights who differ. No assigned source recommends writing without any plan. The word 'scenario' means a play outline in Baker but only the scene-by-scene continuity in Esenwein and Leeds. Munsterberg has no record; Forster is a scoped silence on the word outline. · locator: candidate evidence excerpts source
Rights
| component | license | hosting | redistribution | modification | training | Evidence and notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| documentation | unknown | permitted | permitted | unknown | unknown | Applies to this original summary only, not to the cited sources. |
Linked records
- cites → https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/10865/pg10865.txt
- cites → https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17903/pg17903.txt
- cites → https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1974/pg1974.txt
- cites → https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/36580/pg36580.txt
- cites → https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/70492/pg70492.txt
- cites → https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/70937/pg70937.txt
- cites → https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/73455/pg73455.txt