January 31, 1948: Robert A. Heinlein to Lurton Blassingame
I certainly am sorry to have worried you and will try not to let it happen again-when I get into the final chapters of a novel it is sometimes almost impossible to attract my attention.
January 2, 1950: Robert A. Heinlein to Lurton Blassingame
My method of work is such that I always have a dozen or more stories being worked on.
March 20, 1953: Robert A. Heinlein to Peter Hamilton (editor of Nebula Science Fiction)
The problem of building up convincing background in a science fiction story becomes extremely difficult in the shorter lengths. In ordinary fiction, background may be assumed or most briefly indicated, but it is a most unusual science fiction idea which may safely be so treated. In all the years I have been writing science fiction I have done only one story under 2,500 words, that story being “Columbus Was a Dope”…
October 9, 1956: Robert A. Heinlein to Lurton Blassingame
…However, I have been fiddling with experimental methods of storytelling (none of which you have seen) and I am beginning to think that I may be developing a new method which might turn out to be important. It is a multiple first-person technique, but not the one used by John Masters in Bowhani Junction. Mine calls for using camera cuts and shifts as rapid as those in the movies; the idea is to give the speed of movies, the sense of immediacy of the legitimate stage, and the empathy obtained by stream of consciousness-a nice trick if I can bring it off! The greatest hitch seems to lie in the problem of shifting viewpoints, both without confusing the reader and without losing empathy through cumbersome devices. But I think I am learning how to do it.
I don’t want to use this technique on commercial copy until I am sure I can force the reader to go along with a novel technique. James Joyce introduced into writing an important new technique, but he did it so clumsily that his so-called novels are virtually unreadable; if I do have^ here a usable new technique I want to polish it to the point where it can stand up in the open market in competition with the usual wares whose values are established and recognized.
Ginny suggests that I not use it in science fiction in any case, but save it for a lit’rary novel. She has a point, I think, as it would not be seriously reviewed in an S-F novel. We’ll see.
ATTENTION
November 8, 1968: Robert A. Heinlein to Lurton Blassingame
Sure I signed the Gollancz [a British publisher] contract; and not in invisible ink, either. Then I stuck it into file and sent you the copy I had not signed-convinced that I had signed both of them. Ginny says that whenever she finds my shoes in the icebox, she knows I’m coming down with a story.
So here is the other copy-now signed.
WORKING HABITS
August 31, 1956: Robert A. Heinlein to Lurton Blassingame
…In the meantime, I have turned out no salable copy. Part of my trouble is that I have undertaken to do something which does not fit my working habits, i.e., agreed to produce a story outline. Outlines never have any reality to me, no vividness. Oh, I use what I call an outline but a sort that no editor would accept; it’s actually simply musing on paper-then when the idea begins to take fire, I start at once to write the story itself and become acquainted with the problem and the characters as I go along. Sometimes this results in blind alleys and surplusage which has to be removed (Door Into Summer had Martians in it for half a day, then I chucked a few pages and got back on the track) — but by the time I am well into the story I am writing with sureness, hearing the characters, seeing their surroundings, and having the same trouble coping with their problems that they have. As you can see, this is not a method [that] lends itself to a formal outline, from which I can promise to derive an acceptable story. But it is the method I have taught myself and it works for me.