The benefits of editing from hard copy

I'll go a step further. I've been doing a hell of a lot of editing of academic texts lately, and I can assure you, that for purposes of editing, nothing beats Courier 12-point font. I transform a copy of every file I need to edit into that font, and make it bold. The problems are soooooooo much easier to detect, either in hard copy, or on the screen.

caw

I have recently learned how to send my book to my Kindle, and this has revolutionized my editing process! Seeing my book on Kindle somehow makes it possible to see the writing as if it belongs to someone else. This works even for newly written work.

I can't read courier without getting a headache. I seriously worry at times that there is something wrong with my vision as a result.

Maybe I'm just not used to it.

Yep. I wrote the first draft of my first novel in twelve-point Courier because I thought that was industry standard. I later found out that while it was still a standard, most people just used twelve-point Times New Roman. Mostly due to the advancing in computer word processors, I'm guessing. It's much cleaner, I think, and I've been writing that way ever since.

Thanks. I apologize, again. The advice in this thread seemed relevant and timeless when I found it after a search. It helped me as a newbie.

In another life, I admin'd a car-related forum. Twenty times a month, someone would post a picture of a check engine light and ask "what's this?" That search feature and dragging up old threads, were important. I can see how necro'ing out-of-date facts here would not be, however.

Sorry, again.

Actually, I think this thread is a good thread, and should continue. It's a topic that is relevant to everybody, and has a lot of good commentary in it. To which I'll add this minor point, relevant to my comment about editing in Courier font. I don't recommend that your write in Courier; I don't. But changing the font in a document is dead-muskrat easy, and for me, at the editing stage, Courier just works better. I think it's the monospacing that helps. My eyes ain't none too good at my degree of chronological vitality, and TNR, for example, is a little too pinched; I miss stuff sometimes in that font.

But, absolutely, write in whatever font you find comfy. Me, I use Garamond 14 or Linux Libertine 12 most of the time.

caw

EmilyEmily said:

I have recently learned how to send my book to my Kindle, and this has revolutionized my editing process! Seeing my book on Kindle somehow makes it possible to see the writing as if it belongs to someone else. This works even for newly written work.

Click to expand...

Likewise.
Part of how we read is how we see, so changing things like fonts etc. does make a real difference.

Stephen Palmer said:

Likewise.
Part of how we read is how we see, so changing things like fonts etc. does make a real difference.

Click to expand...

I have actually printed out a MS single spaced in booklet format so it ends up like a paperback (which I insert into a small three-ring binder). Then I read it in bed, where I do most of my other reading. The feeling I get from it is much different from reading the work on a laptop screen. Maybe this is related to Marshall McLuhan's assertion decades ago that "the medium is the message".

Mary Mitchell said:

I have actually printed out a MS single spaced in booklet format so it ends up like a paperback (which I insert into a small three-ring binder). Then I read it in bed, where I do most of my other reading. The feeling I get from it is much different from reading the work on a laptop screen. Maybe this is related to Marshall McLuhan's assertion decades ago that "the medium is the message".

Click to expand...

I think you're right.
Also, I think it's more difficult to fool the brain via paper than via the electronic screen. That's one of the worrying facets of the technological/information revolution.

I'm almost finished my first hard copy edit and it's made a huge improvement over digital. I think it's a little less distracting and, in some ways, like editing twice. As I incorporate the edits I made on paper, it forces me to reconsider them.

Thanks for the idea of putting it in a three ring binder, Mary Mitchell! I think there's something to the medium / message equation.

How is it worrying?

I edit so ridiculously much that paper copies would simply be impractical; it would actually bankrupt us.

I've revised at least some portion of the MS (or if not this one, another MS) every day since December 2016 and I cannot be the only one--I know lots of writers who do this.

I don't think I've edited on a hard copy since about 2006. Since my brain doesn't seem to see a difference between black text on white background whether it's on paper or a screen, I don't waste the paper. Near the end of the editing process, I usually shake things up by reading it out loud to try to catch little errors and bits that don't flow well.

I've also found that it's slower for me to edit on hardcopy. I tried doing that, but I type ~110wpm and I found writing down things soooo slow (I am impatient by nature). There is a slight advantage to editing on hardcopy in that, when your MS is presented in a different font and format, your brain is tricked into thinking it's fresh and tackles it from a different perspective.

I haven't had issues, though, editing and revising on-screen. Maybe I'm just too much of a millennial and love my screens and keyboards.

Another thing I tried was to read on my hardcopy, and make the changes on my screen.

ANY difference in format forces our brains to operate differently, so I create each book in several forms.

• I create the first draft on Word pages set to a 9x6 trade paperback page size, single spaced, with the same margins, headers, font, indents as a printed copy.
• Kindle for viewing on my iPad mini AND Note 4 smartphone.
• Print-on-demand complete with front and back cover.

The final copy for agents and editors is reformatted in the 8 1/2 x 11 double spaced etc. that they are used to. I never read this, just sight-checking it to insure the final-copy reformat worked properly. By this final step I've read the complete book four times with at least a week between each read, and more often a month. Since I'm always working on at least three books simultaneously this is enough to give me the optimum distance between reads.

Everyone works differently. The main lesson however is to format our books in more than one way to encourage our minds to see the text differently.