One-Pass Revision

It might work for some people, but can't be expected to work for everyone. There's also a typo on that link.

Would I try it? Probably. But only because I'm still trying to find an editing method that works for me. But printing out just one of my novels would probably take an entire cartridge of ink (my printer is not the most economical when it comes to conserving ink) and half a package of paper.

I used it for my last book and loved it. But I also edit as I go, which made it easier for me.

I haven’t heard of it, but I am just starting round one of revisions on my first complete novel. I started reading the article and it sounds like a good way to go about it. When I have a little more time, and can read the entire article, I think I may end up following it. Thanks for posting this

I can see my using this on some of my chapters. My characters don't know when to shut up.

Sounds like a good way to edit. Won't half use up the ink though!

yeah, I am still working out how to do this economically in the ink department. So far I have maxed out my black...and my blue...and my green

I guess you could always print a chapter at a time and work on each one indivually. That would slow your ink consumption.

I print 4 or 6 pages to a sheet when I revise and I want a hardcopy to scribble on. I tried 9 to a sheet, and I couldn't read it. And I use A5 (approximately 5" by 8") notebooks--they're easier to carry, and they are made in Europe and have high quality paper.

Anyhow, I read this page when I was getting ready to revise my first book, and while I liked plenty of its advice, I couldn't really see how this allowed me to revise in one pass. I made several passes, each with a different emphasis. For example, if I decided that it really wasn't clear why a character was doing something that he needed to do, I'd write something new for him, and then the new stuff had to be revised and checked for typos, continuity problems, things like that, as well as more profound stuff like its place in the overall narrative flow.

I actually used that article as one of my guidelines during the (monstrous) revision of my novel. And now that my second draft is done, it's clear that one-pass revision is simply not going to work for me. My first draft had some gaping plot troubles and some iffy character motivation (for my antagonist of course. He loves causing trouble!) going on. I can say now, after a year and a half of editing, that my second draft that is infinitely better than the first. But - and here's my current challenge - does all of my rewritten material work? Do my repaired plot points flow? Do my antagonist's newly-existent motivation make sense? And all that other crap I had to fix, does any of it make sense? If not, another (scary!) major revision. And even if all that stuff does work, I still want to make another (less scary) pass for style (since I'm a perfectionist at heart). So I'm looking at a minimum of three drafts before I will feel ready to send this story into the world.

So, my long-winded answer would be that one-pass revision is a great idea but ultimately not feasible - for me at least. Maybe if I were a more experienced writer... but since I'm not, I'm going to have to go with the longer and more ink-intensive editing route. Hope this helps!

ETA - This is all just IMHO - the editing process, like writing, is very subjective!

ETA2 - As for saving ink, some printers have a "draft" setting that prints lighter & uses less ink - or you could change the text color to grey or some other light color (as long as you can still read it!)

soapdish said:

yeah, I am still working out how to do this economically in the ink department. So far I have maxed out my black...and my blue...and my green

Click to expand...

If you go to Print Properties, and change the print quality from standard to fast you'll cut your ink consumption almost in half. The letters are a bit lighter, so I would print a test page first, but I don't have any problem reading it.

I love the idea, but I haven't tried it yet. Most definitely will be as soon as I refill the toner in the laser printer, though. (Scored it for $15! )

This method reminds me of the one-size-fits-all diet books. They can't possibly be good for all individuals, and may actually be dangerous for many since everyone's physiology is unique. Each person is an individual with different dietary needs. And, just like those books, the mantra of doing it as quickly as possible does not always work out to be the best way to proceed. Fast isn't always best, particularly with getting a story submission-ready.

That said, trying to save time on editing is a worthy cause as long as it doesn't skimp on the necessary attention to detail in the line-by-line editing and in the more comprehensive look at the work to judge tone, theme, pacing, coherence of scenes, story arc, and the necessity and sufficiency of the various components of the story. For new and developing writers, whose first drafts are not even close to submission ready, this may not be a good strategy. For those more experienced writers whose first drafts come out closer to the finished product, it may work well. There is good editing advice in article, in terms of what to look for.

MrWrite said:

I guess you could always print a chapter at a time and work on each one indivually. That would slow your ink consumption.

Click to expand...

I know Mr.W didn't mean it this way, but for those who may read it as possibly unintended, this is not a good strategy for editing a story. Each scene has to be evaluated as suggested, but complete reads of the entire story (read like a reader would) are necessary to judge story progression, tone, pacing, and all of the larger-than-single-scene aspects of story construction.

I'm getting ready to spend the summer plunging into revisions and the second draft of my novel, so I find much of her advice here helpful. I highly doubt I can revise in two weeks though! I'd be happy if I can a second draft done by September.

I've found that by printing out things, I can edit not only behind my desk, but also when I'm in a bus or train, which significantly increases my productivity. My old printer had an option in its menu that allows for less ink usage, not sure what it's called because I rarely need to use it. You might want to check out the options panel for your printer to see if it has one. Otherwise, it might be easier to buy a laserprinter.

Of course, if you edit, you don't have to use doublespacing or ridiculous large margins, so you can easily save paper.

One thing worth noting is that this author has been published for more than twenty years and is a full-time writer. Not only is this a method she's evolved to suit her own writing, her first drafts probably are a lot better than someone who is writing their very first book and is learning how to put together a story. She may do a lot of revision, but she's probably not fixing show vs. tell or viewpoint problems.

That being said, take the elements that work for you and leave out the ones that don't.

How do you feel about this method? Why?

Click to expand...

Not for me. I like to edit on the screen because it's a lot faster for me. Instead of writing the change down or crossing something out, then going on the computer and doing the same thing, I do it once, and I'm done. And I think writing down all the removal of characters and scenes in a spiral bound book would drive me crazy (not to mention add clutter around the house with the addition of a notebook).

One thing that helps me--and is probably one of the reasons I can edit on screen--is that I'll tend to focus on one thing and correct it for the entire manuscript. In my last one, I made a pass just to weed out all the repetitions. Then I did the same thing with idioms (it was a historical; I had to look each idiom up). With my current one, I dumped the subplots in one pass. In another, I added scenes with the bad guy throughout.

I would not advise using single line spacing for editing on first drafts. I tried it, and the result was I didn't have space to write down the changes. Perhaps 1.5 spacing might be enough.

Also, I started the first revision of my recent MS two days ago. I am editing it on screen first. But it is Chapter by chapter. My first chapter, I've just slated for a complete rewrite. Chapter two happens tomorrow. Either it'll be an edit or a rewrite. And so on.

Actually there is a way you can do this without the cost and waste of printing off your manuscript. The first parts described in the article, such as describing your story and character arc etc, can be entered in a separate notes file you keep on your story. And another file (you might want to use a spreadsheet) for the logging of scenes. Be sure the scenes are separated by the standard markers in your manuscript.

When it comes to the actual slogging through page by page, the problem people who are working in the word processor have is that they don't catch nearly as much as people reading from a printed manuscript (incidently, someone reading the manuscript aloud will catch more than either of these methods, but I'm not going to ask you to do that). I have a method that will allow you to catch even more.

Frist you should order a decent sized wide screen monitor (at least 22 inches) if you don't have one already. This will save you a lot in the long run. Get it off a discount web site.

Next, open your manuscript file and position it on one side, filling half the screen. Next open a new document and position it to fill the other side. Have any note files and lists you are using open in the background.

Now read through the manuscript page, and then with an idea of what you will cut or add in your head, retype it into the new document para by para. When actually retyping your work you will catch loads of problems you wouldn't have otherwise.

I find it helps to picture a small audience in your mind and imagine you are reading the work to them -- sort of your imaginary writers group. You can imagine an agent, editor, or author you respect in this group and suddenly your writing quality will go up a notch.

I find that imagining I'm reading to actors who will portray my novel in a movie does wonders for the dialogue.

I still print out the whole Manuscript in double spacing, after the second or third edit. It only happens around every two to three years, so the printing costs are not too high, considering. When it's printed out, I read it lot loud, at normal pace, and make major corrections, if I have to. I can't make major corrections on the screen, my mind isn't tidy enough and I'm too forgetful. (By major corrections I mean the possible removal or addition of characters, or even the striking out, or addition of whole chapters.)

After such editing, it's all re-written, in total, and printed our again, in double spacing, again, and that's why it all takes so long. And then the publisher assigns me an editor and, and . . .

Roll on Kindle 2 and all the rest of it.

I use Lisle's method for going from my first to second draft. The second draft is the one I send to beta readers, so I wind up revising again, but I found this method enormously useful for working over my first draft. The print out helps me see the book as a whole and work subplot, characterizations, etc through the story.

I want an iLiad for this very purpose.

Anyhoo...

I print out each chapter as I go, but don't edit 'til the whole thing's finished. I forgot about economy settings for ink but as it's only £1:50 for a cartridge which does roughly 200 pages, it'll only cost £3 to print out this manuscript...I hope. I liberate the paper from my dad's house, so...

My previous one was 701 pages so I'm glad I printed it out in single-spacing to save paper; trouble is it'll be a bugger to edit that way and leave myself notes. Thank heaven for post-its, eh?

There has to be some structure to how you edit, whether it's using this method to organize your attack or some other. This is as good as any.

I used this method for my last MS, and thought it was fairly useful. Like Lily, I edit as I go, so it wasn't the monstrous project it might have been otherwise, but it was still a lot of work. And I mangled the process a bit to fit my own weird brain, of course.

It won't work for all novels, it won't work for all writers, but it was, for me, definitely an interesting new way to think about the process, and it helped me see that my own revision process was a hell of a lot less organized than I thought it was.

I must be more wasteful than I thought, because I assumed most writers printed out entire manuscripts out on a regular basis. I print out multiple chapters daily. Tree huggers hate me. I should be ashamed.

I looked through that article a few months ago. While I don't think her exact process will work for me (at my current stage of writerly development) it certainly gave me a plan of attack.

Editing, for some of us, is a major task and too frequently daunting. It's easy to get caught up in the nitpicks (grammar and word choice, for example) when we should be looking at the bigger picture first. I find myself agonizing over whether to keep certain sentences, maybe I should change that verb?, is this adjective acceptable or should I cut it. Then I realize I don't even know if I'll keep that paragraph yet, because I'm not done fleshing out the sub-plots and character arcs.

So. I found the 'one-pass' idea very helpful, if not directly applicable.