editing techniques....

[preyer]

anyone got any good ones they like to share?

what worked best for me is something i was loathe to try, but damned if it wasn't the best thing i could have done for practical experience. i took a random short story off the internut, one not to short, not too long, and just began editing it in every way i could. this worked really well because they weren't my words, it was a random story from someone i didn't know and they knew nothing about it (i deleted the thing afterwards), and there was absolutely no reason to hold back or be the least bit shy about making the cuts and revisions.

i did this three times then went back to one of my stories. and liked to puke up a lung. having so mercilessly and cruelly slaughtered other stories, i could recognize where mine were lacking. it taught me dispassion for my own words when that phase arrives (though i don't believe anyone can be completely vicious against their own stuff, but it's possible to be damn mean when the time is nigh). it was better to pick very non-professional stories for this, it seemed.

i also know how i write. i tend to put in more words than necessary. so i set a goal for myself to eliminate at least a fifth of the actual word count. whether or not i succeed is something else, but it really forces me to ponder words and phrases better articulated by that 'perfect' word.

[mr mistook]

I'm in the process of revisiting early chapters of my WIP that I started a year ago. This being my first novel, I've been on a steep learning curve, especially since I've joined this forum.

I just cut down a 50 page chapter to 20 pages, and it's better now than it ever was before.

I think if an editor had gotten hold of it before I did, he might have thrown the whole thing out. It wasn't so badly written, but it just rambled on and on, and it was rife with irrelevant details. The main character was not fully in focus.

I can say, nobody could have edited that chapter other than myself. If any other person read it, they wouldn't have had a clue what was pertinent and what wasn't. They wouldn't have been able to elaborate and accentuate the right things.

Bottom line: it just wasn't finished.

As for techniques?...

I found myself consolodating characters a lot. For example, I took a reference to "several" vague people who made vague demands on the protagonist and I reworked it into one solid character who asks something specific.

I strengthened other vague characters. The protagonist's mother was referenced almost in passing, but on editing, I realized that there was a tension between mother and daughter that needed to be highlighted. I brought the mother into sharper releif, giving her some real dialogue.

Consolidation again happened with scenery. In the first draft I had two windows and a thing to the left and a thing to the right and a lot of explanation as to how the protagonist wheedled between these things and focused on one window. In the revision, it became one window and one thing.

I had an encounter with two dogs. I realized that the second dog was pointless, and edited it out of existance.

Final analysis:

Even with added character development and dialogue, I ended up with a much shorter chapter thanks to the fact that I combined and eliminated so much other clutter.

[Writing Again]

I use to write short stories for pulps at a penny a word, and you had better not have an extra word. That taught me so much economy that it hurts a novel.

You were basically allowed "one trait" to describe a person, and "one aspect" to describe a place. If your character had red hair then you didn't spend time describing her nose, eyes, etc.

The road was cobblestone, the room was bare, the bar was dark. That was about the extent of it.

So a lot of my editing consists of adding descriptions.

A lot of the rest is simply playing with words, sentences, and paragraphs until I get the right effect.

[novelator]

I wrote four books before I ever set out to revise one. I was excited about this one, feeling like yeah, it's gonna sell. And it will, but not in its present condition. It took me a while but I realized I did one thing wrong that killed it quicker than an angry editor--I sterilized the damn thing.

I spent almost nine months on that book and when I was finished, by god, there wasn't a word of my writing voice left in it. Not one. And ignorant me, I sent it out like that, garnered a few rejections until a benevolent agent sort of let me in on what the problem was. Then I realized what I'd done to it. I'm going to rewrite it in a year and hope for the return of myself when I do.

I call this procedure whacking my work. A better term is over-editing. I can see now where I've done it to quite a few of my pieces, but no other novels thankfully. And with all the good advice out there, you'd think someone would've mentioned this. Or maybe they have and I just missed it somehow. Perhaps it's not widely discussed because so many submissions suffer from little or no editing, among other things.

I wrote an article about this because I was so damn mad at myself and didn't want anyone else to make the same mistake. If I can resist whacking it, I might get that published one day soon.

It's very frustrating when you figure this out. Good thing I have a callus on my forehead. I swear I felt a tremor the last time I hit that brick wall head on. :)

Mari

[kevacho]

I write with blustery abandon, and I edit with calculated precision (at least, that's what I keep telling myself).;)

Like most writers, I am very closely married to my work, or any particular story I may be working on. I have no real children so these things that burst out of my brain, are mine, and mine alone; little rug-rats of the mind. When I'm writing I intentionally overwrite, throwing in every thing I can think of, even if it sounds stupid at the time. That way when I go back to edit I can do so at will, and with a freedom that allows me to cut liberally if need be. For me, I find that it's better to cut and edit when I've got a lot of material to work with, than have to try and add things in later to ad depth or bulk.

"Live to write. Write to live."

Kevin
www.kevacho.com

[dub]

I use a professional editor...that said, I am on the third rewrite of current manuscript.

dub

[katdad]

Working for a newspaper taught me brevity and clarity (at least it was supposed to). Technical editing of scientific and engineering documents taught me to have an eye for detail.

When I edit I let the writing percolate a couple days before I get down to biz. I may briefly edit a chapter I've just written but if I try to get serious I tend to spend too much time twaddling around in a fresh chapter.

So I go ahead and write the next chapter and then go back to revise the earlier section later.

[Jamesaritchie]

I've always had the knack of writing to length. If I sit down to write a 2,000 word short story, the first draft comes in within 100 words of the mark. Often closer. If I sit down to write a 100,000 word novel, the first draft comes in within a couple of thousand words of the mark. Most like a result of intense journalism training, and of having been an editor.

I don't like the way this sounds, but I do try hard to get things right the first time through. My first drafts are usually clean enough to sell as is, though I very seldom do this. Almost never unless deadline pressure forces it.

For me, editing is cleaning up typos, getting rid of any clunky sentences, strengthening dialogue, etc.

Revising/rewriting comes into play when the plot has problems or the characters need more development.

I enjoy editing, but I write slowly enough that a sentence tends to be edited before it goes down on paper (I write in longhand), and when I transcribe my writing to the computer, I do more editing as I enter it.

[arrowqueen]

I edit on the hoof, print out, read it over, checking for spelling, repetition of the same word in a para. etc - then simply correct it, reprint the page/s I've changed and fire it off.

Seems to work, since I hardly ever get edited at the other end.

[Jamesaritchie]

I edit on the hoof, print out, read it over, checking for spelling, repetition of the same word in a para. etc - then simply correct it, reprint the page/s I've changed and fire it off.

Seems to work, since I hardly ever get edited at the other end.

This is quite similar to my process, except that I edit in my head before I write down a sentence. I spend very little time editing or rewriting after a story is finished. Pretty much for the things you do.

And like you, it seems to work for me. The stories sell, and the only editing I ever get is for the very occasional typo and the like.

But I do take it slow and easy and carefully in the first draft. These get harder all the time. But when a first draft is finished, so is pretty much everything else.

[preyer]

that's a really good point about over-editing. i think with other aspects of writing, like dialogue, description, pace, whatever, editing can be inate or struggled through. some seem to have more of a 'gift' at it than others. for us non-professionals, it's scary to chop your stuff because you're not always sure what to cut, what to keep. add to that the seemingly constant pressure of keeping it as short as possible, and it's easy to see how a ms can be hacked to bits and what life there was goes less lived.

so, i think it's really worth noting that therein lies a major difference between short stories and novels; the latter you can let flourish (to a certain degree, of course). the flip side is so drowning it in detail and dialogue that's it's twice the size it should be and half as big as it needs to be after a particularly evicerating editing. generally speaking, though, i've noticed most stories can stand to be cut down more than built up, and the parts that need a little extra a lot of times amount to a few well-placed 'perfect' words.

mm's example sounded like a really good example of self-editing-- cripes, if you can slice 70% of your words and still have a story, that's pretty impressive. i think the trick there, and with my own stuff, is not to remove *too* much. i invariably add description to a story as i review a section. like j, i tend to write in longhand (not by choice), and things get altered at the point of attack while entering it into the computer. while j has an amazing talent and/or skill at editing, i'd say the vast majority of professionals still bang out many drafts, so for the rest of us these are good things to know, heh heh.

is it just me, or does writing in longhand just makes for better rough draft material? i might not write as much in longhand, but having the concentration and time while doing it saves me time later on. or am i just a freak?

[gp101]

I use editing to combat writer's block. Seriously, I know where I want to go with a story, but sometimes I can't decide which route is best to get from A to B, so I go back and re-read from the least-edited chapter; if I'm only on chap 3, I'll re-read (and edit) from the very beginning. If I'm on chap 20, I'll go back two or three chaps, to the point I've read the least. Not only do I pick out a lot of typos, but I recharge my battery so to speak, and create a little momentum so that when I reach the point of the story I left off at, I go over it like a steam roller. **Warning: this ain't for everyone. It works for me and didn't delay my writing that much. My 90,000 word msp took a total of 8 months from the blank page to the final edit for beta readers.

When I finally typed "the end" (and had many self-congratulatory cold beers), my first edit were the last few chapters (the freshest ones of course). Then I re-read the entire thing four, five more times, or however long it took really. The first re-read was to eliminate words--mostly unnecessary adjectives and adverbs. Next one was to focus more on sentence structure and vary my sentence length. The last couple read-thru's were for continuity checks, and voice check.

Then it was off to beta readers. Once I hear back from them, I'll make the final revision (or 3 or 4), and if there are no major problems, I will send out that damn query and synopsis I've been working on for weeks.

[Risseybug]

I use editing to combat writer's block. Seriously, I know where I want to go with a story, but sometimes I can't decide which route is best to get from A to B, so I go back and re-read from the least-edited chapter; if I'm only on chap 3, I'll re-read (and edit) from the very beginning. If I'm on chap 20, I'll go back two or three chaps, to the point I've read the least. Not only do I pick out a lot of typos, but I recharge my battery so to speak, and create a little momentum so that when I reach the point of the story I left off at, I go over it like a steam roller.

I used this techniques with my first book. The current thing I'm working on, my Nanowrimo project, I am just writing and writing and writing, and I'll edit it when this insanity is over. I think I like this way better. I have to write every day to get to that 50K words, so the creative juices flow almost every day to get it done.

It's very interesting the things you come up with when you're under the gun. And when I go back to my next YA novel, instead of taking me three years like my first book did, I think I'll have it done in six months. Done and edited.

[Jamesaritchie]

is it just me, or does writing in longhand just makes for better rough draft material?

It certainly makes my first drafts much better, though why is controversial. Brain studies have shown that writing in longhand uses the drawing center, the creative center. It's automatically a right vrain activity.

For me, the slowness of writing in longhand is also a great benefit. I've heard many writers say they use a computer because they can write so much faster, that their hands can keep up with their brain. I never have understood why this is considered a good thing.

The last thing I want is for my hand to keep up with my brain. I want my mind to think things over, to look at a sentence two or three times, before I actually write it down.

I write slowly, I write neatly, and by doing this every sentence has been looked at from several angles before it's put on paper. In other words, I rewrite and edit in my mind before I commit anything to paper, so my longhand first drafts are extremely clean.

Even when forced to write a first draft on a computer, I treat the computer like it's a manual typewriter. I have a program that makes the keyboard sound like a typewriter, I pause between pages, I type the way I would on a manual typewriter. . .newspaper style, rather than touch typing, etc.

[Writing Again]

I don't do as much editing as I once did. My first novels were just dumped on the page without thought to grammar, word choices--What I wanted to say.

Now I may have a better way of saying something, or I may drop a sentence or paragraph, but I never look at a jumble of words and wonder, "What was the idea of that?"

I do write slower now, because I may spend time choosing the right word, the right sentence, the right paragraph the first time; I don't wait to worry about it somewhere down the editorial road.

I also wrote a lot of sentence fragments, and run on sentences, and disconnected sentences, because I did not know how to connect related ideas together in a properly structured form: This was why I had to study grammar, even though I hated it. I could speak correctly, I could write correctly, but I could not go beyond that. What I wanted to say needed to be said with more skill than understanding what constituted a preposition phrase or a subjunctive clause.

Thus this self editing slows down the first draft but speeds up following drafts: Probably a good thing.

[Jamesaritchie]

Thus this self editing slows down the first draft but speeds up following drafts: Probably a good thing.

This is exactly how it works for me, and it does seem to make a dramatic difference.

[novelator]

Over-editing has everything to do with not recognizing your voice. I also think that once your style gels, you slow down naturally. Your sentences are tighter, your word choices are better the first time through as opposed to the first few pieces you wrote where you were in such a rush to get the thing out of you. At least that's how it worked for me. It feels like I write slower now, but I'm still just as productive. The editing is easier later because I'm not in such a hurry through the rough draft. And I've learned to trust myself, my inner vision, and my voice, so I'm not taking myself out of the work during revision. That was a hard lesson learned there. For me, the whole process has been passage through a series of phases. Not that I'm close to done yet, any more than I'm done living.

Mari

[Writing Again]

Over-editing has everything to do with not recognizing your voice.

I don't think I have a "voice" or a "style."

I just say things the best I can.

[Jamesaritchie]

I also think that once your style gels, you slow down naturally. Your sentences are tighter, your word choices are better the first time through as opposed to the first few pieces you wrote where you were in such a rush to get the thing out of you.

A good point. I do try to vary my style a great deal, depending on the type of story I'm writing, but all writers have a natural style. It's unavoidable. Finding your own style, your own voice, is what separates writers who sell regularly from writers who don't.

And once you have found your natural style, once it ceases to be a struggle just to get something down in a way that makes sense, I think writing does get tighter and cleaner the first time through.

[mr mistook]

...once it ceases to be a struggle just to get something down in a way that makes sense...

That's what I'm struggling with right now. If I were writing a memoir or a column, It wouldn't be so tough. For those kinds of writing, my style is pretty well developed, but when it comes to omnicient narration of a novel, I have a way to go yet.

[Jamesaritchie]

but when it comes to omnicient narration of a novel, I have a way to go yet.

I don;t use omniscient narration in a novel. It isn't, at least, omniscient from my perspective. In first person, I use the voice of the protagonist, and in third person I use the voice of the viewpoint character.

[Julie Worth]

Here’s a couple of things I do.

To catch those errors I keep reading over blindly, I often increase the text size to make the words wrap differently. And even better, I change both the text size and the font, so that the look is completely different. Or I print it to a PDF file and look at that.

To force myself to polish a piece, I send it out with a query as a writing sample. So an agent will be looking at this piece from the middle of my novel, a piece that now has to stand all by itself. I’m about to stamp it and I think, oh my god what drivel! And I rip up the envelope and get to work.

[Stlight]

My first drafts are always in longhand, that's ow I get the emotion in, the typing into the computer gets the melodrama out. When I "finish" which may be the third of fourth draft, I'm usually around 100K or more words. Mss goes in a box and in the drawer for three months. I work on something else while the one in the drawer waits. I spend time not writing and let the drawer mss drift or not through my mind. If I get a "Well, that should be changed." I write it on a note card and stick it into the mss box, I do not start working on the mss.

After three months I take the mss out, organize the cards, if any and begin the final edit. During the final edit I remove 10 to 15K words. This tightens the book. The time in the drawer lets me see things that are wrong, some small and some major. What would be major? Allowing a character to use a power or gift he/she didn't have. If the character is almost tone deaf in chapter one, he/she better not be playing an instrument beautifully in chapter 15, or he/she shouldn't without an interesting explanation of why. (And that explanation is probably for a different book. I got 100K without it, adding it would be too much for the book.)

Yes, at one time I suffered seriously from kitchen sinkitis. I still have to remember, if it doesn't move the plot, get rid of it. There maybe a few people interested in the details, but most of them are working as university profs. Even university profs don't want to study with every book they read. Deciding that I was a story teller and not an historian helped with this particular affliction.

Stlight