Dilemma from a beginning writer

[ZMShah]

Here's my dilemma. A few weeks ago, I sent a short story to Clarkesworld Magazine. They kept it for three weeks, and sent me a "your story was close" rejection letter, which was super exciting. Now, during those three weeks that the story was at Clarkesworld, I improved it tremendously. Since I'm a beginning writer, I'm constantly learning new things about the craft and this allowed me to REALLY improve the story in the space of a few weeks.

After I got the rejection, two weeks ago, I sent this much improved version of the story to Apex. And then, in the two weeks since, I managed to improve the story even more! Thus, my dilemma is, hypothetically (and this is a big hypothetically), if Apex does accept my story, how do I present to them my even more much improved version? I've changed a lot of things: dialog, the ending, grammar, wording -- all for the better. How would I bring these proposed changes up?

Also, I would like to add that I learned a valuable lesson from all this: don't be impatient, perfect what you write before sending it out. I sent the story off after a week of editing, and I edited immediately upon finishing the story. I would have been better served if I started editing a week after the writing, and edited for several weeks.

[izanobu]

If they accept it, you can just offer the newer version. But really, why are you working on a story that is already getting "good" rejections instead of writing new stories? Quit messing with just one story and go write more :) Let the submissions stand.

[alexshvartsman]

First of all, congrats on the close call at Clarkesworld. In itself, no small feat.

Be prepared to wait a while with Apex. I sent them a story on 11/10 and was notified that it made it past the slush round on 11/17, but no word since then.

Should they accept your story, I think it's perfectly fine to say "hey, I kept tinkering with it, do you want to see an updated version." Otherwise, you can always send an improved version to the next market.

My personal process is to finish the story and let it "stew" for a few days before I go back to it. I *always* end up making a bunch of changes after some time has passed and I can look at it with a relatively fresh eye. At that point I e-mail it out to some beta readers, get feedback, adjust it some more based on that and only then submit it.

Alex Shvartsman

[Marvin Ghey]

Yeah, if someone picks your piece up, you can talk to them about revision. Don't sweat it 'til it happens.

At the same time, though, let me echo Alex a little and say that you shouldn't rush stuff out too fast. I tweak stories endlessly, but I also am careful not to send stuff out until I'm sure I have a good, solid draft that (a) I know would have a shot, at least, at being accepted and (b) meets my own standards. You're still new to the process, of course, and, like you pretty much said, still figuring your standards out. Still learning. Which is great. And which we all are doing. Or at least should be. So keep on writing and keep on submitting; just don't be in too much of a rush.

[RexZentah]

I started in painting pictures. When is a painting finished? Has a painting ever been finished? When is a story finished? The answer is never.

I find if I read my stories to people, they tell me what's missing.

[Polenth]

Once you send a story out to a market, don't read it again until you get a response. If they accept or reject it, that's the time when you read it again. Otherwise, you'll spend forever fiddling with that story and not writing anything else.

[jaksen]

Once you send a story out to a market, don't read it again until you get a response. If they accept or reject it, that's the time when you read it again. Otherwise, you'll spend forever fiddling with that story and not writing anything else.

This is true. I agree with the mushroom person.

I am a short story writer and once you send it out, move on to the next. If the submitted story gets a rejection or two, then re-evaluate, revise or rewrite.

Otherwise, move on to the next story.

[Jamesaritchie]

Here's my dilemma. A few weeks ago, I sent a short story to Clarkesworld Magazine. They kept it for three weeks, and sent me a "your story was close" rejection letter, which was super exciting. Now, during those three weeks that the story was at Clarkesworld, I improved it tremendously. Since I'm a beginning writer, I'm constantly learning new things about the craft and this allowed me to REALLY improve the story in the space of a few weeks.

After I got the rejection, two weeks ago, I sent this much improved version of the story to Apex. And then, in the two weeks since, I managed to improve the story even more! Thus, my dilemma is, hypothetically (and this is a big hypothetically), if Apex does accept my story, how do I present to them my even more much improved version? I've changed a lot of things: dialog, the ending, grammar, wording -- all for the better. How would I bring these proposed changes up?

Also, I would like to add that I learned a valuable lesson from all this: don't be impatient, perfect what you write before sending it out. I sent the story off after a week of editing, and I edited immediately upon finishing the story. I would have been better served if I started editing a week after the writing, and edited for several weeks.

How do you know the rewrites are better? If the first attempt got a "close" rejection, you shouldn't have touched the story.

Once you submit a story, you shouldn't even read it again until and unless an editor asks for a rewrite. You certainly shouldn't be rewriting it at all until then. You gain ground by working on new stories, not by continually tinkering with old ones.

Stop rewriting unless requested. That's murder.

[Writer5]

I haven't published anything but I've been in groups where I edited after submitting a story and found them upset with the changes I had made. Not that they weren't good changes, but they responded based on what I gave them. I would suggest not editing anymore until you're asked to. Being asked is a good thing. The best of luck to you!

[Ineti]

Once you send a story out to a market, don't read it again until you get a response. If they accept or reject it, that's the time when you read it again. Otherwise, you'll spend forever fiddling with that story and not writing anything else.

This.

I am a short story writer and once you send it out, move on to the next. If the submitted story gets a rejection or two, then re-evaluate, revise or rewrite.

Otherwise, move on to the next story.

This. Except I'd wait for a dozen or more rejections. There are a lot of markets out there. (Granted, your writing goals might dictate how many rejections you'll accept before tinkering.)

Once you submit a story, you shouldn't even read it again until and unless an editor asks for a rewrite. You certainly shouldn't be rewriting it at all until then. You gain ground by working on new stories, not by continually tinkering with old ones.

And this. Once you've started sending a story off to markets, don't tinker with it again until someone offers to buy it and gives you specific feedback.

Apply any knowledge learned from writing that story to the next one. Resist the urge to tinker. Write a new story and send it out. Then another, and another. Good luck!

[johnnysannie]

How do you know the rewrites are better? .

Stop rewriting unless requested. That's murder.

Yes, exactly.

You run the risk of rewriting the story into dreck. Leave it alone until asked and then do what the nice editors say - within reason.

[KingM]

You've received some wise advice. Go write another story and leave this one alone.

[Chris P]

I agree with those who say to leave the story alone once you send it out. Of the stories I've had published, the editors wanted changes I didn't expect, so an effort to rewrite it might have changed it into something they didn't want.

As to your question, see what the editor says first, and if the changes you made fit then offer them. If not, save the ideas for a new story to send elsewhere.

[Jamesaritchie]

Yes, exactly.

You run the risk of rewriting the story into dreck. Leave it alone until asked and then do what the nice editors say - within reason.

Once famous writer, I can't remember which, called this process "stirring mud". It happens. Too much tinkering, and pretty soon you're just stirring mud.

[katsincommand]

I am a short story writer and once you send it out, move on to the next. If the submitted story gets a rejection or two, then re-evaluate, revise or rewrite.

Otherwise, move on to the next story.

I learned that this year. What I'm writing now is better than what I wrote before and revised, revised, revised... I have to keep reminding myself what's in the past, sstays in the past. Can't go backward.

[ZMShah]

Thanks for the key advice, everyone!

[jaksen]

Keep us informed as to how you make out.

With the story, that is. :)

[Truth and Fiction]

I think there's a big difference between fiddling with a story and over-editing needlessly vs. the story not being totally polished in the first place, which is what the OP seems to be talking about. So I guess the lesson -- and I think you have already learned it -- is to polish the story completely and then send it out. But just because you send a story out doesn't mean it has to be off limits to revision if you become aware of real problems and weaknesses (rather than just messing with the story because you have nothing else to work on).

I'm a big proponent of sitting on stories for a little while and making sure they are truly ready before sending them out into the world. There's nothing worse than getting rejections on stuff that you came to realize just wasn't ready in the first place -- and sometimes, depending on the writer and the piece, it can take some time to know if a piece is truly ready.

I have a short story collection coming out next year, and many of the stories were first written years ago. I'm still revising some of them. Every writer is different, of course, and maybe it's different for scifi vs. literary, but I just don't see the benefit in rushing to submit -- especially if you're a newer writer still learning the ropes.

[Jamesaritchie]

I think there's a big difference between fiddling with a story and over-editing needlessly vs. the story not being totally polished in the first place, which is what the OP seems to be talking about. So I guess the lesson -- and I think you have already learned it -- is to polish the story completely and then send it out. But just because you send a story out doesn't mean it has to be off limits to revision if you become aware of real problems and weaknesses (rather than just messing with the story because you have nothing else to work on).

I'm a big proponent of sitting on stories for a little while and making sure they are truly ready before sending them out into the world. There's nothing worse than getting rejections on stuff that you came to realize just wasn't ready in the first place -- and sometimes, depending on the writer and the piece, it can take some time to know if a piece is truly ready.

I have a short story collection coming out next year, and many of the stories were first written years ago. I'm still revising some of them. Every writer is different, of course, and maybe it's different for scifi vs. literary, but I just don't see the benefit in rushing to submit -- especially if you're a newer writer still learning the ropes.

Once you send it out, leave it alone until someone asks for changes. There is something worse than getting rejections for something you realize wasn't right in the first place, and that's fiddling with it, rather than working on something new.

Pretty much every story gets rejected because it wasn't ready, because it could have been better, because it needs to be written another way.

And new writers are the ones who should never, ever fiddle with a story. Old pros know when to fiddle, and when not to. Beginning writers usually don't have a clue, and they'll probably never get a clue by changing things already in submission.

Fiddling is always a bad idea, and, honestly, even reading those stories again is a horrible idea, because if you do read them, you will fiddle endlessly. And you won't improve the real problems, no matter how much you think you are.

[Truth and Fiction]

Once you send it out, leave it alone until someone asks for changes. There is something worse than getting rejections for something you realize wasn't right in the first place, and that's fiddling with it, rather than working on something new.

Pretty much every story gets rejected because it wasn't ready, because it could have been better, because it needs to be written another way.

And new writers are the ones who should never, ever fiddle with a story. Old pros know when to fiddle, and when not to. Beginning writers usually don't have a clue, and they'll probably never get a clue by changing things already in submission.

Fiddling is always a bad idea, and, honestly, even reading those stories again is a horrible idea, because if you do read them, you will fiddle endlessly. And you won't improve the real problems, no matter how much you think you are.

I think we clearly have different philosophies about writing and revision, which is fine; no two writers work the same way. I think our disagreement stems from the definition of "fiddling" with a story. It sounds like the OP was still learning the craft and making good and useful edits to the story after sending it out. Obviously, if a writer is "fiddling" with a story and making it worse, that's no good.

But if someone is so new to the craft that she must put something away after writing it because she does not even have the tools to revise, then she doesn't have any business submitting that piece to journals in the first place. (This is not a comment on the OP, by the way, just a more general statement.) Saying, "After you write it, wait for an editor to ask for changes before doing anything" could be good advice for a seasoned writer; for a new writer (or most writers) it could encourage laziness and the faulty assumption that lit mag editors are going to be the ones to step in and teach revision/writing.

[izanobu]

FWIW, I didn't start selling until I quit fiddling and just started writing a larger volume of new stuff. Each story got better because I was actually practicing instead of messing around with one thing (and I was submitting instead of trying to polish something into "perfection").

Everyone's process will vary, but if something is already out on submission, I say leave it alone. It'll sell or it won't, no worry. Meanwhile, write something new and put that out there. Generally people learn how to write better by writing, not by fiddling with stuff.

[Buffysquirrel]

If you are going to offer a market a revised version of a story they've accepted, I'd recommend not waiting until the copyedits are in. That tends to cause a lot of screaming.

[stormie]

As you said, ZMShah, you're a beginning writer. But it does sound like you're doing okay in the writing dept. Just let a story go once you submit it. Only revise when it's been rejected. Move on.

But that's water under the bridge. You already revised it. Leave it. If what you submitted is accepted, leave it. Don't bother with emailing the editor about your revised story. They're accepting the story you submitted. They might even have their own suggestions.

You're doing good. Now write something else.

[Shringarey]

ZMShah,

You have some terrific tips on your blog. Keep up the good work.

[ZMShah]

ZMShah,

You have some terrific tips on your blog. Keep up the good work.

Thank you, sir! I feel more motivated to put up some more content!