Do you blow it up and start over? Going from a different character's perspective?
Do you only address problems mentioned from work shopping?
Do you say "fuck it, and that no one can recognize your genius and talent?"
Or is it something between?
I'm conflicted myself.
I print out the first draft and mark it up with good ol' pen ink, then open a blank Word document and rewrite from word one. I always consider the problems mentioned in workshopping, but nothing anyone else says is gospel. I like to compare LBLs, if everyone had an issue with one part, then it's probably time to rework it. If some people got it and some people didn't...then you have to have the internal dialogue and figure it out. For me, it usually adds to me reworking a scene, but not always in a really dramatic way.
It depends how much I like something, and how long it is, how much I've invested in it.
I'm not as harsh as I should be, generally, because I usually like what I write. I haven't done a lot of workshopping, but more or less as Sparrow said. If a lot of people had an issue somewhere, it needs a hard look. If some got it and some didn't, make a judgment call.
I tend to print out and read or put something on my ereader to read. Ink or an e-ink screen tend to help me see problems more quickly and accurately.
I edit heavily. I try to reduce word count a lot, eliminate fluff, stick to what's essential and cut things that are bloated and wordy. Keep things tight.
For a novel, obviously there's a lot of moving stuff around, adding things, cutting things, drastic rewrites... short stories for me tend to either seem spot-on for the most part or totally messed up and in need of reworking. Novellas... somewhere in between.
Printing out a copy on paper and going at it with a pen was something I hadn't heard of.
The same with limiting word count to get more impact out of your work.
But, I can't wait to give those a shot to see what new insight I can get.
A while back I submitted a story for work shopping by the writing lab at my university. The review seemed to be positive but he mentioned something about the magical realism that was below the surface bubbling up to the top and how I should make it clearer or bring it out more. The funny thing is, I don't do magical realism and I kind of thought I was rooted in realism. The review weirded me out but I guess it's just one of those things.
It's nearly impossible for me to do heavy edits on the computer without confusing myself or losing focus. Printing it out and using a pen helps me focus. That may be a personality quirk, or just because it is what I am used to, or it might actually be better, haha.
I haven't gotten a strategy that works for me just yet. I've done the "print and kill with red ink" thing, I've simply re-read several times, finding something each time. One thing I do almost every time is let it sit untouched for a month after the first draft has been written. I find I come back to it with fresh eyes.
Workshopping here has helped tons, because usually it tells me that there's an issue that I have overlooked. I'm especially thankful when most readers identify the same problem or inconsistency. Then I know I made a big boo boo.
I'm interested in seeing what others do when they revise their work.
I'm still kind of struggling with a concrete revision attack plan, but basically what I've been doing is:
1. Re-read the damn thing like 500 times.
2. Have a few other people read the thing 500 times
3. Print and attack with a red pen, red-lining things I don't like and going off the suggestions of my beta readers.
4. Draft 2 is a complete re-write, keeping what I liked, tightening sentences, and scrapping or replacing what didn't work.
Then it's lather, rinse and repeat if necessary.
I really wish I had beta readers. I basically don't have more than a couple friends who read, and they're generally busy but for one, and he doesn't tend to have much feedback other than to say he thought something was good or great. I don't know anyone here having moved from another state. I really need to meet some people.
I just sort of wing it.
Revision? I don't understand. I write. I send out. I move on.
I kid. There are writers like that and they are my mortal enemies.
Other revision tactic: Read the work out loud.
I tend to revise on the computer, reading over the story and editing as I go. I might read through/edit the story a dozen or more times this way. Though it depends on the story. I'm working on a story now that is the third complete rewrite (i.e., I've written a brand new story three times using the same basic idea). Why? Because the prior versions just didn't work for me. For this story, I'm writing the first draft in Google docs so that I have access to it from anywhere. I've written 6,000+ words so far. I've transferred that into Scrivener (my first time using it). I really like that each scene is its own file so that I can look at them on the bulletin board and move them around as needed, which works for this story because the scenes don't take place linearly.
At some point, I'll start my reading/revising method using Scrivener. I think I'm really going to like Scrivener because I can make notes about various things and have them right there, instead of scattered in notebooks.
@Michael: "I really wish I had beta readers." Dude, you do. It's called the LitReactor workshop.
Richard Thomas, Caleb Ross, Gavin Pate, and I tackled this very topic in a detailed podcast a while back.
The Velvet Podcast Episode 016: Great Writers Edit. Bad Writers Discuss Editing On a Podcast
I edit as I go. A curse, I know . . . So a novel that takes me three years to "draft" only takes me about six weeks to "edit," during which time I make around three entire passes, with a checklist for the kinds of things I'm looking for in each pass, be they consistency or character arcs or grammatical or proper names or whatever. And I limit myself to just those things each pass, making notes of others that I happen to catch incidentally. Objectivity is no problem since so much time has passed by that point. Last time, I also had two years' worth of workshop feedback to sort through, which was its own challenge, especially bigger-picture issues, as well as determining which feedback improves and which doesn't.
I really wish I had beta readers.
We're here. We're queer. And we're really good at critiquing. Put it in the workshop.
Right now, my strategy is to write it and then try to revise it. I can't revise my own stuff unless I let it sit for a long while, so I've changed that to 'write it and put it in the workshop'. It's made my stuff much better, much faster.
I try to go through and look for grammar and spelling mistakes that spell-check didn't catch, but I'm blind to those things in my own writing when it's fresh.
Oh yeah, that's why I'm here. Well, one of the reasons. I do sometimes wish that people I knew had more interest in reading my stuff, though.
Oh yeah, I read each draft out loud when I think I am done with it. I almost always find something awkward in it.
I agree with SparrowStark, until printing out the first draft and grabbing a pen, It was fairly difficult for me to edit within the program.
After the initial mess of marks I make on the printed pages, I retype it all into a fresh document while reading it out loud... again, and iron out any awkward wording and add sentences or even whole paragraphs in between what I have already written to clarify and make the story more fluid.
I have a real hard time throwing anything out, an idea here and a character there, I save everything. Eventually each and every one of them will find a home, I hope.
I revise the day before the exam! Lots of Red Bull! Flash cards! Rote memorization!
God I can't wait to leave high school and become an adult!
We don't call it "revision" in 'Murrica, Fylh. We call it "studying" or "cramming".
Studying? What even IS that?
I finished a draft and then, after taking someone's advice, wrote the same story from the point of view of another character.
I still like the original version of the story better but there are things that came out of the other draft that I would like to include the original.
But hell, they were minor things and I wonder if it was worth the process of writing a whole other story. Especially, if there were better ways to revise.
What's the best way? Getting hookers and laughing gas?
Turn off the computer, have an orgasm (by yourself or with someone else), then revisit the story.
Time passage can help you gain better perspective, too. We're often too precious with our firstborns (drafts). A few months in a drawer without food or water will make that little shit appreciate you. Wait, what were we talking about?
@sparrow, I like your method. perhaps you could send me some video of how you go about it, so that I might better incorporate it into my writing practice.
I'll let you know when I get the pay site up and running.
I have no single strategy.
The only consistant thing I do is walk away from it for a few days and then come back. I print it out and do the red pen thing too.
It all depends on if the story is working for me or not. I have changed perspective between characters, changed from 1st, and 3rd person, and sometimes it's a matter of starting the story earlier or starting later.
Unless I'm working with an editor I always rewrite the entire piece.
I have the bad habit of editing as I go along. Makes my 'first' drafts more like an actual third or fourth draft, but it also causes me to write annoyingly slow.
Two things that I have started doing that I think has helped me is wait about two weeks-a month after I write something before rereading it. Like others, I have also started to print out the story(thank god for work printers am I right?) and going over it with a pen.
How do you follow through with a certain idea? I have a tendency to have a few story ideas and then I abandom them the following week. And then some linger in my mind still.
Just develop those that still linger, as they're probably the worthwhile ones.
Like screenwriters who adapt novels. Often they'll read the book, put it away, and just write the scenes that stayed in their minds.
EDIT: Also, this article offers some excellent revision techniques. I remember someone recently telling me that they change the font, background color, etc. before starting a revision pass, to help distance themselves from the material. Distance seems to be the key to objectivity, echoing what many of us have said above.
I was actually just listening to the Velvet Podcast on editing, which was quite fun. Gordon, you were even on that, and someone, I don't remember who, mentioned changing the font and stuff. I'd never thought of that, kind of a neat idea.
It can be hard to distance yourself, but I seem to be fairly good at it. Which is almost unfortunate. In the end I hate almost everything I write if I go more than a few weeks without reading it, or it becomes too familiar if I read it earlier and I end up getting bored to death by it.
I wish I wasn't so critical. I tend to head-edit almost anything I read, even if it's by someone who's a much better writer than I am, so I tend to feel pretty badly about my own work.
I'm in the print it, read it aloud, red ink it and type-it anew camp. I think this works very, very well for tightening up, adding where it needs fattening up, re-arranging, etc.
Another technique I like to employ - if I workshop - I open up a word document and in that document type up a summary of comments & criticism I receive. Then I can kind of glance it over and see what's working, what's obviously not working, etc. This has been really helpful and helps me get the most out of workshop.
I'm also doing a trial period with Scrivener and while I'm yet to really get to learn it, it looks promising and looks like it should be invaluable for the editing (and organization) aspect.
Michael and Gordon thanks for the links. I'm going to check those out.
I feel too close when I'm revising a lot of the time. But there are times when I like what I've come up with and then a week later I'll look at the same project and want to throw it away.
Otis, I like the idea of having a helpful critique or review while you revise. That way it keeps important things fresh in the head. I've heard a lot of good things about the Scrivener. What is it? Do I sound like a caveman?
Once I am done with my first draft I will save it away in my computer's folder for like a a week or two, letting my mind sort of 'forgets' what I have written. Then on the second or third week I will print the first draft and read and go through it, adding annotation or corrections with highligters and pens. It worked for me so far.
It will amazes you how many errors and silly mistakes you've have done on the first draft. You'll never be able to pick up and detect the errors if you attempt to read and revise it straightaway after you have completed the first draft because you mind and eyes sort of 'used to' it already and will easily bypass reading the errors. But if you wait for a couple of weeks and let the draft sit for a bit and approach it with a fresh pair of eyes, your revision will be much better. I usually repeat the whole process twice before sending it over to my publisher.
BISIK, my debut novel is out now and can be purchased via Amazon. Thank you.
Simple: make it better without going crazy.
For me most of the work is editing.
