Tackling Editing

[Paul Whybrow]

In an interview that originally appeared in the Guardian, George Saunders, author of Lincoln In The Bardo explains how he edits his writing:

Flipboard on Flipboard

With the experimental form of Lincoln In The Bardo I imagine that he did hundreds of rewrites of its 340 pages; to give you some idea of the complexity of the narrative, the audiobook version uses 166 readers—including Hollywood stars Julianne Moore, Ben Stiller, Lena Dunham, and Don Cheadle.

I like what Saunders says about respecting the reader, an attitude that I explored in an old thread. Saunders uses a computer to write his manuscripts, which must have made things easier with his successful novel:

"I write in Word. I loved WordPerfect but then the Word juggernaut rolled right over the poor little guy. This computer is given to me by my university and the default word-processing program is Word – so there you go. The only thing I ever write longhand anymore are notebook entries. And even then I usually end up typing them into a file. I have really horrible handwriting. I print out every day so there's no danger of losing anything. And lots of times, in retrospect, it might have been better if I had lost something."

(From: George Saunders: My desktop )

These days, with the ease of altering a manuscript that a computer gives us, I sometimes wonder about what the definition of a new draft really is....In the old laborious days of writing everything in longhand, and even in the less flexible method of using a typewriter, different drafts were readily distinguishable by their altered layout. On my laptop, I can change the order events happen in a chapter with three section breaks in seconds—does that make it a new draft? Or, does a draft only exist when someone else, someone important like a literary agent, claps their eyes on it? Up until then, your story is a tree falling in the forest that no one hears.

With my WIP, I've tried a different way of editing, by staying in one or two chapters for several days. This has permitted me to finesse the descriptions, while worrying that such tinkering around may be gilding the lily. I like this way of working, in that it's encouraged me to consider the frame of mind of my characters at that particular moment, which might make their actions more believable.

How do you edit....is it a daily chore, or weekly?

Do you do regular trawls through all you've written so far, perhaps using the Word Search function to find repeated words?

Are you content to leave the editing until you've completed the writing? I did that with my first novel, which admittedly was way too long at 179,000 words, and spent five months chipping barnacles off the hull of the monstrous leviathan I'd created. This woeful experience motivated me into doing regular editing of the WIP.

Are you fortunate enough to have a trusted reader, who offers helpful suggestions?

 

[Carol Rose]

I edit as as I go, one scene or one chapter at a time. I don't like to get too far into the book before I know I'm on the right track, there are no timeline issues, and there are no major mistakes back there.

I know most people hate editing, but I've never really understood that. I've never found it to be a chore. It's part of the writing process for me. A chance to tighten things up and write something a better way. I often find out new things about my characters in the editing process that I hadn't considered before.

I have an extensive self-editing checklist I use to find everything from filter words to plot holes. Some of the things on the list are intuitive now, but it never hurts to go back and use it again to make sure I haven't slipped into lazy writing habits.

 

[N D Taylor]

"Every child I've had felt like a head injury." I love this phrase, it rings so true!

 

[Robinne Weiss]

Who are your editors? It is such a simple question on the surface, but it goes to the heart of our closest relationships. Who cares about you enough to want to read what you have written? Why do they care? Who cares about you too much to tell you the truth about your writing? Why do they care? Who cares about you so much that they want to control or stop your writing? Why do they care?

The only editors I truly trust are those I pay a professional rate to. Everyone else, no matter what their relationship to me is, is likely to lie in one way or another. I still use colleagues and acquaintances, friends and family--their responses can be useful--but I don't rely on them. Nothing beats a professional.

 

[Matnov]

Blast out a a first draft then wade through proof after proof. Strictly a keen amateur so I do all the work myself. Be nice to have a professional editor but its not on the agenda at the moment.

 

[Andrew F]

I grew up with pen and paper but now find it hard to write anything except on a computer. Although this has so many obvious advantages, on a computer things take on an illusory or premature 'finished' quality, all neat and legible and spell checked even in a first draft. Also, I find it just too easy to tinker and fiddle when I should really be rewriting some things from scratch.

 

[Amber]

I edit as I go. I used to think I didn't edit at all. But that's not totally accurate. Most likely, the things I turned in could have used more of an edit.

Who are your editors? It is such a simple question on the surface, but it goes to the heart of our closest relationships. Who cares about you enough to want to read what you have written? Why do they care? Who cares about you too much to tell you the truth about your writing? Why do they care? Who cares about you so much that they want to control or stop your writing? Why do they care? It can be a rather raw issue which I completely sidestepped by ending up in Germany where English readers are few and far between. The distance imposed by a foreign language has provided the comfortable security of a cage inside which no rawness is to be found anywhere. The question I often ask is: when you put yourself into a cage, is it possible to write your way out of it? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that the only way out is out! into the unknown!

What you describe sounds like a critique and that's being generous. It's not usually a good idea to ask people who care about you to read what you've written. They tend not to be good judges. Often they're not readers or writers.

It is strange that there is this tendency to beg for specific criticism about imaginary things (stories) while feeling so defensive about criticism of real things. There is a false intimacy associated with such a situation, but maybe it is useful for the development of strategies to navigate the labyrinth that is real intimacy. Not everyone likes to play that game.

This is odd. You're saying that stories aren't real. They're fiction but that doesn't make them unreal.

Also, if you use beg in the archaic sense of the word (to ask) what you say makes sense but that's no longer what it means. People usually ask for critiques. They don't beg. There's no one on their knees or with hands clasped. There's no pleading. It tends to be a much more emotionless exchange.

Now, if I get criticized when I hadn't asked for someone's opinion I might be annoyed. Whether I got defensive or not would depend. All of which has nothing to do with editing. Because in general, I wouldn't ask family and friends to edit what I write. It's not even a good idea to ask them their opinion.

I'm not sure the false intimacy is false. It took me a while to figure out what (I think) you may mean by bringing up intimacy. Writing is personal. We know this. When you ask someone to read what you've written, especially when it's fiction, you are letting them know something about you. In general, the better the reader, the more they'll know about you even if your writing isn't very good. It's a particular type of intimacy and now that you bring it up, it's one of the reasons people read--to get up close glimpses of someone else's reality. Which leads me to another point. If there isn't any reality in your fiction it will most likely be gibberish.

I tried working with some old friends in the states who also dabble in writing, but they were far too polite in their criticism. One of them complimented the drawings I later removed from the text, but she didn't say much about the writing. The other thought it would've been better if I reduced the length by 90% (fair enough). He mainly liked the sci-fi tropes and the part where the protagonist is killed. Overall, it was not a very encouraging reaction. I write for fun, so I don't really care.

Don't ask friends or people whose writing efforts you don't respect to read your writing and give advice. Mostly, you're talking about critiquing, not editing.

 

[Amber]

How do you edit....is it a daily chore, or weekly?

In a haphazard fashion and as I write.

Do you do regular trawls through all you've written so far, perhaps using the Word Search function to find repeated words?

I have used the word search function but not usually. You could say I trawl through what I've written.

Are you content to leave the editing until you've completed the writing?

No. I'm not. Although, should I finish a manuscript I find worth editing I imagine I'll need to edit it even more.

Are you fortunate enough to have a trusted reader, who offers helpful suggestions?

People who critique can usually be trusted for one thing or another. There's someone I can trust to tell me when I get it right. There's someone I trust to tell me when I've offended her sensibilities. Although, to be fair, she doesn't say it that way. I can still tell when she doesn't like something. There's someone I can trust to tell me whether something won't work. There's someone I trust to notice just about everything that's wrong with what I've written. There's someone who gets all the jokes. People see different things and usually what they see is related to their own writing strengths and interests.

And to be honest ... there's someone I can trust to always make me feel good about my writing. It's her nature to want to make people feel good about their efforts. To be somewhat crass ... they're all useful.

 

[Amber]

I edit as as I go, one scene or one chapter at a time. I don't like to get too far into the book before I know I'm on the right track, there are no timeline issues, and there are no major mistakes back there.

I know most people hate editing, but I've never really understood that. I've never found it to be a chore. It's part of the writing process for me. A chance to tighten things up and write something a better way. I often find out new things about my characters in the editing process that I hadn't considered before.

I have an extensive self-editing checklist I use to find everything from filter words to plot holes. Some of the things on the list are intuitive now, but it never hurts to go back and use it again to make sure I haven't slipped into lazy writing habits.

I once took an RWA class on editing. The instructor had people color code elements of their writing. It was very detailed and although it might be useful someday, it was a little too much for me. But interesting.

 

[Carol Rose]

I once took an RWA class on editing. The instructor had people color code elements of their writing. It was very detailed and although it might be useful someday, it was a little too much for me. But interesting.

A few of the digital first publishers actually do this when they send edits back to the author. I'm SO glad Evernight and Siren never did. LOL!

 

[Emurelda]

I've defined the first draft as something I am ready to show someone else like a critique partner. It's neither an embarrassment to share with someone nor is it ready for an agent to read.

Editing for me are layers of work.

I'm currently going through the first layer which is the overall structural plot - does the main protagonist plot arc work.

Then I fix all the sub-plots. Do they work, are they necessary? Do they add to the story if they are kept or are they redundant and can be thrown out?

Then I embellish a bit more on scenery especially as most of my work consists of world-building.

Then dialogue - this is when I look at the characters and work out whether they would say what they say in keeping with their personalities.

Then once I'm happy that all that works - I'll go through the copy-editing...the actual narration. The grammar, the spelling, the punctuation all the bits and pieces that make it look more professional. Have I used the perfect word for this description? Can I restructure the sentence to tighten up the scene/ maybe add tension if necessary. I'll be asking a lot of questions about it from the point of view of a reader as well at this stage.

I like working from the big picture and zone it to the more minute detail. Otherwise, I find it harder to let go of text if I've invested time in the actual words from the very beginning. I used to do it that way and found it didn't help me complete the novel. Of course, this process may be 'easier' (inserting cackling laughter here) with my next novel.

 

[Kitty]

Approaches to self editing vary from individual to individual. I know some people who spend ages getting each chapter perfect before moving on to the next and others who like to blast out a fast dirty first draft and then mould it into shape. There is no right or wrong way. I probably fall somewhere in between.

With my publisher we went through three stages of editing.

The first was the structural edit - this concentrated on big picture stuff. A lot of this had been thrashed out with my agent prior to submission so wasn’t major.

Next was the line edit - the fine tuning and minor inconsistencies etc.

Finally the copy editor whose job was to make the ms print perfect.

I really enjoy the editing process. Both the self editing and the professional edit. It’s anazing the things a professional editor spots that completely pass you by!!!