Editing 911
Posted by Andie Ryan Blog at 8/15/2009 4:07 PM 
Categories: Editing Notes, Revision Backroads
Tags: editing commercial writing storytelling writing style wordsmithing professional editor editor revision motivation character Dwight Swain Techniques of the Selling Writer
Categories: Editing Notes, Revision Backroads
Tags: editing commercial writing storytelling writing style wordsmithing professional editor editor revision motivation character Dwight Swain Techniques of the Selling Writer
If your goal is to compete commercially in the marketplace (and even if it isn't), your fellow workshop students, teachers, agents, and those advising about literary agents will tell you to "be persistent." Initially it's common to think that this means being persistent with agents and publishing houses, perhaps even sticking to your guns when discussing revisions. But if you don't have a saleable or readable product, all the persistence in the world won't get you results, and you may even make a pest of yourself in the process.
Think of persistence as it relates to the craft of writing itself, to making your own writing better. Think of it as developing the maturity and objectivity to acknowledge that your work can almost always be improved, especially the early drafts. This is even more important if your work has never been evaluated by a professional editor and never undergone the subsequent revision process.
Friends and family, even strangers, may love your book. It's not that they would be dishonest about telling you what they really think. They're telling you the truth as they know it, and these are important validations for any writer. But remember that they are probably responding to the story more so than the technical aspects of storytelling or the literary muscle you show on the page. They may not be thinking of your competition. These are things a professional editor notices, and things you can learn from.
By editing, I don't mean wordsmithing or line editing, that gentle massaging of sentences and rearranging of paragraphs to smooth things out and improve a story's flow. Real editing is wholesale cutting and deletion, rethinking characters and whether they're even necessary to the story, rethinking actions and motivations, cutting chapters and adding new ones, and then looking at the overall story to see if everything still fits the way you want it to.
I'm going to recommend again Dwight Swain's book, TECHNIQUES OF THE SELLING WRITER, as a tool to help guide your own revision process. The awful truth is that most manuscripts cry out for this kind of attention, and writers may not always be in the best position to judge what a manuscript needs, especially when the manuscript is their own.
Stylistic revisions are sometimes hardest to consider, because these get closest to how you write, or how you want to write. One example is fact-dumping, writing those mega-paragraphs of information and backstory that suggest the book will end on the seventh page because there won't be anything left to tell. This is common in early drafts; I was guilty and probably still am to some degree. But when done by a first-timer, it can be perceived as amateurish by those looking for any reason to reject you. Remember that old workshop joke where a student objects to an instructor's criticisms by saying, "Well, Hemingway did it." The instructor's response? "You're not Hemingway." (Or Michener, or Clancy, or McCarthy.)
So be subtle. Pick the right time to disclose the right information relative to a character's actions or internal reflection. Don't interrupt your dialogue to squeeze it in -- this is analogous to an actor doing asides to the camera. If your work is criticized for this in workshops or reading groups, take a hard look at what's on the page. It's not that it's always wrong, necessarily, but if it's noticed, then it's probably done too much. Strip the lengthy prose away and then select where each sentence belongs -- if anywhere.
What are your stylistic hurdles? Good and not-so-good editor experiences? And if you're serious about this, check out www.bookdocs.com (Independent Editors Group) and read the editor biographies. Look to organized writing workshops in your area, or start one of your own.
If I write twenty more novels and I'm lucky enough to get them published, I don't envision ever getting to a level at which I wouldn't listen to an editor. For those of you who might be concerned that your story will cease to be your own, that is part of the doubt that temporarily settles in during the revision process. But if you're....persistent....YOU will bring it back to the terrain you've already landscaped via that same process.
A competent editor won't usually give you direction that is so specific as to make the story wholly different. A good editor knows that you must still call the shots for your characters and make the decisions relative to the story's action. Even if something specific is suggested, it will almost always lead you to a different place or, if you disagree with it, cement something you already know.
There is no plateau of "best." History and performance judge what's best. But there are several plateaus of "better" in any career or avocation. Even Tiger Woods consults Steve Williams about a shot now and then. Even a maestro has to practice. Strive to make your writing the best it can be, and see what happens.
Think of persistence as it relates to the craft of writing itself, to making your own writing better. Think of it as developing the maturity and objectivity to acknowledge that your work can almost always be improved, especially the early drafts. This is even more important if your work has never been evaluated by a professional editor and never undergone the subsequent revision process.
Friends and family, even strangers, may love your book. It's not that they would be dishonest about telling you what they really think. They're telling you the truth as they know it, and these are important validations for any writer. But remember that they are probably responding to the story more so than the technical aspects of storytelling or the literary muscle you show on the page. They may not be thinking of your competition. These are things a professional editor notices, and things you can learn from.
By editing, I don't mean wordsmithing or line editing, that gentle massaging of sentences and rearranging of paragraphs to smooth things out and improve a story's flow. Real editing is wholesale cutting and deletion, rethinking characters and whether they're even necessary to the story, rethinking actions and motivations, cutting chapters and adding new ones, and then looking at the overall story to see if everything still fits the way you want it to.
I'm going to recommend again Dwight Swain's book, TECHNIQUES OF THE SELLING WRITER, as a tool to help guide your own revision process. The awful truth is that most manuscripts cry out for this kind of attention, and writers may not always be in the best position to judge what a manuscript needs, especially when the manuscript is their own.
Stylistic revisions are sometimes hardest to consider, because these get closest to how you write, or how you want to write. One example is fact-dumping, writing those mega-paragraphs of information and backstory that suggest the book will end on the seventh page because there won't be anything left to tell. This is common in early drafts; I was guilty and probably still am to some degree. But when done by a first-timer, it can be perceived as amateurish by those looking for any reason to reject you. Remember that old workshop joke where a student objects to an instructor's criticisms by saying, "Well, Hemingway did it." The instructor's response? "You're not Hemingway." (Or Michener, or Clancy, or McCarthy.)
So be subtle. Pick the right time to disclose the right information relative to a character's actions or internal reflection. Don't interrupt your dialogue to squeeze it in -- this is analogous to an actor doing asides to the camera. If your work is criticized for this in workshops or reading groups, take a hard look at what's on the page. It's not that it's always wrong, necessarily, but if it's noticed, then it's probably done too much. Strip the lengthy prose away and then select where each sentence belongs -- if anywhere.
What are your stylistic hurdles? Good and not-so-good editor experiences? And if you're serious about this, check out www.bookdocs.com (Independent Editors Group) and read the editor biographies. Look to organized writing workshops in your area, or start one of your own.
If I write twenty more novels and I'm lucky enough to get them published, I don't envision ever getting to a level at which I wouldn't listen to an editor. For those of you who might be concerned that your story will cease to be your own, that is part of the doubt that temporarily settles in during the revision process. But if you're....persistent....YOU will bring it back to the terrain you've already landscaped via that same process.
A competent editor won't usually give you direction that is so specific as to make the story wholly different. A good editor knows that you must still call the shots for your characters and make the decisions relative to the story's action. Even if something specific is suggested, it will almost always lead you to a different place or, if you disagree with it, cement something you already know.
There is no plateau of "best." History and performance judge what's best. But there are several plateaus of "better" in any career or avocation. Even Tiger Woods consults Steve Williams about a shot now and then. Even a maestro has to practice. Strive to make your writing the best it can be, and see what happens.
Comments