So how does one polish a manuscript? That's going to be different for every writer but this is how I do it.
I'm a pantser so my drafts go something like this. Draft 1. Way too short and messy but gets the bones of the story down. Draft 2. Takes those bones, shuffles them around if necessary to fix them and expands the whole thing out to a reasonable length. And yes, I fix typos and any language I notice sucking as I go along but I can't do a full polish at this point because I'm too busy chopping and changing things plus it usually not until the end of draft two that I figure out what the book is really about.
Which brings us to Draft 3 (which is the one that gets sent to my editor and agent). This draft is the detail draft. So what do I do?
1. Put the manuscript together in one chunk. Draft one and 2 I tend to work in chapter documents. No idea why but it works for me.
2. Print it out in arc form so I can read it in hardcopy (I find it easier to spot typos etc on paper).
3. Copy the whole thing and dump it into Wordle. Wordle is something one of my crit buddies found last year when I was at this point with Shadow Kin. It's great. You dump in your text and it gives you back a picture of the most common words in your book. The bigger the word, the more times it appears. This is brilliant for two reasons. Firstly, it makes any the habitual weasel words you tend to use (that, back, like, just, slightly etc) that have been overused, stick out like a sore thumb so you can then go back and specifically search for them and kill them. And secondly, it tells you the other things that stick out in your book. This is helpful (if you're kind of visual) for getting a feel for character screentime (though in first person this is trickier), how your subplots are balancing and maybe spotting any other words that might be coming up a lot (clues to theme!).
4. Do a couple of passes to kill the weasel words discovered via Wordle. I sit down and do a find on each of the words and work through the manuscript for each. It doesn't take too long to do. I find this usually highlights a few other things that might be repeated as you work through (repeated character actions and phrases etc). After I've done this, I'll dump it back into Wordle and check again.
5. Read the whole thing and note clunky bits, typos, anything else that bugs me. I'm not looking for wholesale structural things (though of course, if I found something I'd fix it (and probably cry at this point!). I'll also look for worldbuilding things. Have I broken any rules I've set up? What new rules or mythology have I created? Have I got languages etc right? (If I'm clever at this point, I'll add this into my world bible). The last thing I'll look for in this read will be continuity. Names, clothes, hair color, eye color, places, timelines. Does it all make sense?
6. Reading will also trigger some story things to fix (hopefully only small things...plots to flag earlier, threads to weave in a bit more firmly etc).
7. Sit down and fix all the stuff from the read. While I'm doing this, I'll be paying close attention to my character's voices. Do they sound distinct enough? Do recurring characters sound like they did in the first book? Do the new character's sound different enough?
8. Possibly dump it all back into Wordle yet again, just to see if it looks right.
9. The last thing I'll do will be a spell check, a US language check and another typo hunt.
10. Send the darn thing to my editor and agent and crack open some bubbly.
11. Open up a new document and start Book 3.
Showing posts with label revising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label revising. Show all posts
October 10, 2010
June 19, 2010
Almost
Heading into the home run of the structural part of my revision. A few scenes to reslant to make sure all the new threads are lining up, a few new bits to write and then it will be done.
I think it works but I'm at the point right now where I have no idea whether it does or not. I guess I'll find out once I hand it in. But first, I have to make it to the end then another pass to polish things up one last time....then it will start all over again with book 2.
I think it works but I'm at the point right now where I have no idea whether it does or not. I guess I'll find out once I hand it in. But first, I have to make it to the end then another pass to polish things up one last time....then it will start all over again with book 2.
May 06, 2010
Re-visioning
Given that I have revisions on the brain right now, I thought I'd talk a bit about them. I've probably done so before but hey, I can't remember right now (revision brain strikes!).
In general, I think writers fall into two camps. There are those who hate writing first drafts but love all the polishing and revision that comes afterwards and there are those who love writing first drafts but find revising harder work.
I tend to fall into the latter group. I love the freedom and fun of finding out what my story is in the first draft. A first draft that's flowing and working is pure joy to me. Then, when I get to the end, it's always a bit sad to realise "oh man, I just wrote x amount and now I have to go back and fix it all".
But given I write short first drafts with a severe lack of description and narration and er, lots of other things, I don't think I'm ever going to get away from having to do several drafts of my books. Even more so now I have an editor adding her brilliant insights after I've slogged away for a couple already.
Revision for me, consists of two main things:
1. Editing which is polishing and tweaking language and fixing up continuity and layering in some details and making character voices distinct etc. It's detail, small picture, word by word stuff.
2. Actual revising which is structure and plot and arcs and all that stuff that generally requires big picture thinking. This is the stuff that makes your book actually hang together as a whole. It's easy to write a lot of good polished scenes that don't work together if you don't spend time on the big picture.
So once I come to the end of my first draft, I put the book away for a bit but when I pull it out again, I need to do both types of editing. For me, I usually sit down and work out what I think the book needs right now. What's working, what isn't. What stuff appeared at the end that needs to be taken back and pulled through the book. What threads did I drop? How did the story change from what my initial idea? Am I happy with how it changed or did I lose my way? To help with this I might write the synopsis, or do scene lists. I definitely re-read the notes I made for myself throughout the manuscript as I was writing.
This stuff for me, is hard work, to force myself to be very analytical about the story but I've realised in the last little while as I've thought about this particular story that I do enjoy this part. It's not 'revising' which, to me, sounds boring. It's re-visioning. Redefining what the story is, what it can be. Finding where it needs to bloom or shrink. Working out how to make it shine. Giving myself a vision of it to work too. Of course, actually doing the work is still hard but I think I can get behind the concept that I'm re-visioning rather than revising. Which might just be a strange writer brain quirk but as in all things process, whatever gets you through the night (or draft).
Anyway after, I do my thinking, I sit down and do another draft. I do a reasonable amount of detail work (otherwise my betas and critique partners would likely be asking if I was on drugs) but it's mostly about fleshing out and making the big picture changes I've needed at this point. My draft usually grows by about 25 to 30 percent. This is the draft I send out to my betas and critique partners and agent for comments.
When I get those back, I do another draft to fix the stuff I've inevitably missed and make the story better still. And then probably do some quick passes through to really tweak language or world stuff (stuff like searching for US vs Aussie language, overused words, etc etc). I focus on one thing at a time and each pass might only take a few hours (the "find" feature in Word and speed reading are very very useful at this poitn). This sounds like a lot of drafts but I tend to revise fast because that's what works for me, so it's not months of work. Um, unless I've stuffed something up majorly.
After that, it goes back to my agent for submission (or I guess, from now on, to my editor!) What happens after that point depends on the editorial process. Most likely another draft then line edits then copyedits. At which point I will be thoroughly sick of the book and probably thinking it's complete dreck. Because that is also inevitable for me. Once you've read a book over and over, you lose all perspective (which is why you need betas and crit partners and agents and editors).
During all of this I'll also be working on drafting something new and then the whole darn process will just start over again. That's the glamourous writing life for you!
In general, I think writers fall into two camps. There are those who hate writing first drafts but love all the polishing and revision that comes afterwards and there are those who love writing first drafts but find revising harder work.
I tend to fall into the latter group. I love the freedom and fun of finding out what my story is in the first draft. A first draft that's flowing and working is pure joy to me. Then, when I get to the end, it's always a bit sad to realise "oh man, I just wrote x amount and now I have to go back and fix it all".
But given I write short first drafts with a severe lack of description and narration and er, lots of other things, I don't think I'm ever going to get away from having to do several drafts of my books. Even more so now I have an editor adding her brilliant insights after I've slogged away for a couple already.
Revision for me, consists of two main things:
1. Editing which is polishing and tweaking language and fixing up continuity and layering in some details and making character voices distinct etc. It's detail, small picture, word by word stuff.
2. Actual revising which is structure and plot and arcs and all that stuff that generally requires big picture thinking. This is the stuff that makes your book actually hang together as a whole. It's easy to write a lot of good polished scenes that don't work together if you don't spend time on the big picture.
So once I come to the end of my first draft, I put the book away for a bit but when I pull it out again, I need to do both types of editing. For me, I usually sit down and work out what I think the book needs right now. What's working, what isn't. What stuff appeared at the end that needs to be taken back and pulled through the book. What threads did I drop? How did the story change from what my initial idea? Am I happy with how it changed or did I lose my way? To help with this I might write the synopsis, or do scene lists. I definitely re-read the notes I made for myself throughout the manuscript as I was writing.
This stuff for me, is hard work, to force myself to be very analytical about the story but I've realised in the last little while as I've thought about this particular story that I do enjoy this part. It's not 'revising' which, to me, sounds boring. It's re-visioning. Redefining what the story is, what it can be. Finding where it needs to bloom or shrink. Working out how to make it shine. Giving myself a vision of it to work too. Of course, actually doing the work is still hard but I think I can get behind the concept that I'm re-visioning rather than revising. Which might just be a strange writer brain quirk but as in all things process, whatever gets you through the night (or draft).
Anyway after, I do my thinking, I sit down and do another draft. I do a reasonable amount of detail work (otherwise my betas and critique partners would likely be asking if I was on drugs) but it's mostly about fleshing out and making the big picture changes I've needed at this point. My draft usually grows by about 25 to 30 percent. This is the draft I send out to my betas and critique partners and agent for comments.
When I get those back, I do another draft to fix the stuff I've inevitably missed and make the story better still. And then probably do some quick passes through to really tweak language or world stuff (stuff like searching for US vs Aussie language, overused words, etc etc). I focus on one thing at a time and each pass might only take a few hours (the "find" feature in Word and speed reading are very very useful at this poitn). This sounds like a lot of drafts but I tend to revise fast because that's what works for me, so it's not months of work. Um, unless I've stuffed something up majorly.
After that, it goes back to my agent for submission (or I guess, from now on, to my editor!) What happens after that point depends on the editorial process. Most likely another draft then line edits then copyedits. At which point I will be thoroughly sick of the book and probably thinking it's complete dreck. Because that is also inevitable for me. Once you've read a book over and over, you lose all perspective (which is why you need betas and crit partners and agents and editors).
During all of this I'll also be working on drafting something new and then the whole darn process will just start over again. That's the glamourous writing life for you!
December 20, 2009
Examining no
While I'm still thinking about revisions, here's some thoughts on feedback and critiquing. I think feedback and critiquing are vital as long as they come at the right part of the process for you (which is something you need to work out). These days I need to do the first draft and have that solid feel for the story before I get much feedback other than brainstorming when I'm stuck or else it can throw my writing off. I need to get my version of the story down before I can let other voices into my head about it.
But once I'm through that first draft I know that fresh eyes will see things in the story that I never can and help it grow stronger (plus catch all those annoying typos and inconsistencies that stay in no matter how many times I read the darn thing *g*)
However being critiqued is never a pain free process for most people. Partly because when you first get any negative (for want of a better term, ie something needs fixing) feedback, the instinctive reaction of most people is "no no no, my book is just fine, I made it pretty, why don't they like it, wah, no no no, I'm going to go and eat worms and take up stamp collecting". Or something like that depending on your maturity level, your current hormonal state and what else is happening in life generally. Sometimes feedback is like water off a ducks back, sometimes it will sting more than you expected or wanted it too.
This is human nature. You've worked hard and now someone is telling you that, for them, all your hard work hasn't quite delivered. Most people naturally get defensive in this situation (it's essentially a mini-rejection or might be an actual rejection depending on who it's coming from....) Which is why it's a good idea to just listen or read and then sit on negative feedback until that initial defensiveness goes away and the rational part of the brain takes over and remembers that "this bit didn't work" doesn't mean "your book sucks, you're a hack and you're ugly too". This is why lots of writing workshops etc insist that the person being critiqued can't talk during a critique.
It's fine to have that initial reaction but it's not fine to stay at that level of reaction. You can vent about it (in private) or sulk (in private) or whine (in private) but eventually you have to put on the big girl pants and move past the defensive and detach the emotion so you can look at the work and evaluate the comments rationally so you can make your book better. It's also why, as a critiquer, you need to give positive and negative feedback and think about how you phrase feedback.
When you get feedback of the "this didn't quite work" or "have you thought about X" variety, I think there are four main categories of reactions, two positive, two negative. First the positive:
1. "Yes!! That's brilliant, why didn't I think of that?, I love my crit buddies because they are geniuses and deserve medals and chocolate." These are the comments that you just instinctively know are right for your story, that give you insight into something that was eluding you or give you a piece that's missing or just make something better. Take this feedback and run with it and tell the person who gave it to you that they are pretty and shiny and give them Tim Tams.
2. "Yes. Damn, I was hoping no-one would notice that." This is the reluctant-but-you-knew-it-was-coming yes when someone calls you on something that didn't quite work or where you haven't quite gone deep enough etc. Those bits that you kind of vaguely know in your gut aren't quite working but that you ignore for now in the hope that you're wrong. You're not and you've just been told. So you're going to have to run with these too.
Then we come to the no's. No is trickier.
1. "Hell, no!" This might be the opposite of "Yes, that's brilliant" ie something you know just isn't right for the story you're writing (which is fine, it's your story and it's your job to make the 'hell, no' call so you don't get pulled off track or break it) or it might be your initial instinctive defensive reaction. You need to wait a bit and see if it morphs from 'hell, no" to either of the yes versions (which it might just do). How long that takes depends on your process. It might also morph to the second sort of no...
2. "No, because..." This is the one to really pay attention to. If your reaction is no, z can't happen because x, y or w or no, A wouldn't do that, because of B and C, then you need to stop and think. It's great that you know why the feedback or suggested fix isn't right for your story but it's not so great that your reader didn't understand why. So you need to look at it again. Is stuff in your head that's not on the page? Have you not made a motivation clear? Did you do something confusing that gave them the wrong impression? Most of the time, no because means you need to go back and do a bit more work to clarify. Not always. Sometimes whoever is critting for you just doesn't click with your story or wants it to be a certain way and you may have everything in place you need for it to work your way and they'll still argue for a different way.
No because is a gift because it spotlights where you need to do work and often gives you insight into the story. I know I'm often surprised by a "no because x" because I hadn't consciously thought about the x part before but it pops up from the subconscious right when it's needed. This is true for me in brainstorming too. It's my "no, that's not quite it" reactions to people's suggestions that often guide me to the right solution. The no becauses are what I most often want to talk about with my crit buddies to explore why my view of something hasn't gotten across to them and how to make it work.
So there you go. Most importantly, regardless of how you feel about the feedback you received, you thank the person and appreciate the time they've taken. Time away from their own writing or lives to read your scene or chapter or book. Time they've spent trying to help you and your story. That's an awesome thing to do and why great crit partners should be treasured (mine all rock, btw : ) ) and fed chocolate or whatever they prefer regularly.
But once I'm through that first draft I know that fresh eyes will see things in the story that I never can and help it grow stronger (plus catch all those annoying typos and inconsistencies that stay in no matter how many times I read the darn thing *g*)
However being critiqued is never a pain free process for most people. Partly because when you first get any negative (for want of a better term, ie something needs fixing) feedback, the instinctive reaction of most people is "no no no, my book is just fine, I made it pretty, why don't they like it, wah, no no no, I'm going to go and eat worms and take up stamp collecting". Or something like that depending on your maturity level, your current hormonal state and what else is happening in life generally. Sometimes feedback is like water off a ducks back, sometimes it will sting more than you expected or wanted it too.
This is human nature. You've worked hard and now someone is telling you that, for them, all your hard work hasn't quite delivered. Most people naturally get defensive in this situation (it's essentially a mini-rejection or might be an actual rejection depending on who it's coming from....) Which is why it's a good idea to just listen or read and then sit on negative feedback until that initial defensiveness goes away and the rational part of the brain takes over and remembers that "this bit didn't work" doesn't mean "your book sucks, you're a hack and you're ugly too". This is why lots of writing workshops etc insist that the person being critiqued can't talk during a critique.
It's fine to have that initial reaction but it's not fine to stay at that level of reaction. You can vent about it (in private) or sulk (in private) or whine (in private) but eventually you have to put on the big girl pants and move past the defensive and detach the emotion so you can look at the work and evaluate the comments rationally so you can make your book better. It's also why, as a critiquer, you need to give positive and negative feedback and think about how you phrase feedback.
When you get feedback of the "this didn't quite work" or "have you thought about X" variety, I think there are four main categories of reactions, two positive, two negative. First the positive:
1. "Yes!! That's brilliant, why didn't I think of that?, I love my crit buddies because they are geniuses and deserve medals and chocolate." These are the comments that you just instinctively know are right for your story, that give you insight into something that was eluding you or give you a piece that's missing or just make something better. Take this feedback and run with it and tell the person who gave it to you that they are pretty and shiny and give them Tim Tams.
2. "Yes. Damn, I was hoping no-one would notice that." This is the reluctant-but-you-knew-it-was-coming yes when someone calls you on something that didn't quite work or where you haven't quite gone deep enough etc. Those bits that you kind of vaguely know in your gut aren't quite working but that you ignore for now in the hope that you're wrong. You're not and you've just been told. So you're going to have to run with these too.
Then we come to the no's. No is trickier.
1. "Hell, no!" This might be the opposite of "Yes, that's brilliant" ie something you know just isn't right for the story you're writing (which is fine, it's your story and it's your job to make the 'hell, no' call so you don't get pulled off track or break it) or it might be your initial instinctive defensive reaction. You need to wait a bit and see if it morphs from 'hell, no" to either of the yes versions (which it might just do). How long that takes depends on your process. It might also morph to the second sort of no...
2. "No, because..." This is the one to really pay attention to. If your reaction is no, z can't happen because x, y or w or no, A wouldn't do that, because of B and C, then you need to stop and think. It's great that you know why the feedback or suggested fix isn't right for your story but it's not so great that your reader didn't understand why. So you need to look at it again. Is stuff in your head that's not on the page? Have you not made a motivation clear? Did you do something confusing that gave them the wrong impression? Most of the time, no because means you need to go back and do a bit more work to clarify. Not always. Sometimes whoever is critting for you just doesn't click with your story or wants it to be a certain way and you may have everything in place you need for it to work your way and they'll still argue for a different way.
No because is a gift because it spotlights where you need to do work and often gives you insight into the story. I know I'm often surprised by a "no because x" because I hadn't consciously thought about the x part before but it pops up from the subconscious right when it's needed. This is true for me in brainstorming too. It's my "no, that's not quite it" reactions to people's suggestions that often guide me to the right solution. The no becauses are what I most often want to talk about with my crit buddies to explore why my view of something hasn't gotten across to them and how to make it work.
So there you go. Most importantly, regardless of how you feel about the feedback you received, you thank the person and appreciate the time they've taken. Time away from their own writing or lives to read your scene or chapter or book. Time they've spent trying to help you and your story. That's an awesome thing to do and why great crit partners should be treasured (mine all rock, btw : ) ) and fed chocolate or whatever they prefer regularly.
December 18, 2009
Making it shiny
Comments are starting to come back from crit partners and betas so my mind is turning back to the book. I'll get Miriam's comments later today but she's given it the tick of approval (not that the tick of approval means no more work needed lol).
So work on draft three will begin soon. For me the process goes something like this:
Draft 1 - write version of book that is way short (about 75% of what it should be) and full of people talking and severely lacking in setting and description etc. Early in this process do a collage and a soundtrack.
Revision pass 1 (to get to draft two) - read draft 1 and make notes to self about stuff that is missing, stuff that doesn't make sense, threads that need to be picked up etc and many comments along the lines of "expand" "what the heck are these people wearing" and "setting please". Start thinking about solutions to some of these problems. Then I generally cut down the soundtrack and maybe add a few new songs to it and perhaps fiddle with the collage or make another one if I need to though I didn't do that this time. If there's structural stuff I want to do (ie shift stuff around or make major story line changes or fix pacing etc) or if I don't quite feel I've got a handle on the book, I write a synopsis because that helps me see it a little more clearly. Then I get to work putting a lot of stuff in, circling back to layer stuff, cleaning up the language and getting it to the point where I'm not ashamed to let people see it. I prefer to revise fast but it takes as long as it will take.
Draft 2 goes to my agent and my crit buddies (either in full or bits) and any other beta readers. While they read, I chew my fingernails, become convinced the book is terrible and that my agent will sack me and try and distract myself by working on other stuff. The back brain also goes to work on the things that I think are still not quite right with the book.
The next revision pass depends on what the comments are and what my thoughts are. There might be structural things, there might be just polishing and tightening, there might be worldbuilding to solidify or subplots to tweak. I have my views on what the book needs right now and I'm waiting to see what else the readers see that I just can't. So while I wait, now that I have some comments, I'm going to do some revision prep:
1. Do the first draft of the synopsis and a scene outline. This gets the "what happens" back in my head and shows me the POV balance and timeline.
2. Play with the soundtrack some more. The muse is still happy with the collage, so apparently I nailed that early on this time.
3. Do some braindumping/free writing about the comments and my concerns to see what turns up.
4. Whatever else the muse tells me to (look for images, watch certain films or tv shows.
5. Possibly bore people who gave me comments with questions and discussions.
Then I'll do the next pass (and probably start to hate the book again and whine a lot) and it will go back to Miriam. Hopefully she won't want another pass but you never know. If she does then, it'll be lather, rinse, repeat until I get it right.
So work on draft three will begin soon. For me the process goes something like this:
Draft 1 - write version of book that is way short (about 75% of what it should be) and full of people talking and severely lacking in setting and description etc. Early in this process do a collage and a soundtrack.
Revision pass 1 (to get to draft two) - read draft 1 and make notes to self about stuff that is missing, stuff that doesn't make sense, threads that need to be picked up etc and many comments along the lines of "expand" "what the heck are these people wearing" and "setting please". Start thinking about solutions to some of these problems. Then I generally cut down the soundtrack and maybe add a few new songs to it and perhaps fiddle with the collage or make another one if I need to though I didn't do that this time. If there's structural stuff I want to do (ie shift stuff around or make major story line changes or fix pacing etc) or if I don't quite feel I've got a handle on the book, I write a synopsis because that helps me see it a little more clearly. Then I get to work putting a lot of stuff in, circling back to layer stuff, cleaning up the language and getting it to the point where I'm not ashamed to let people see it. I prefer to revise fast but it takes as long as it will take.
Draft 2 goes to my agent and my crit buddies (either in full or bits) and any other beta readers. While they read, I chew my fingernails, become convinced the book is terrible and that my agent will sack me and try and distract myself by working on other stuff. The back brain also goes to work on the things that I think are still not quite right with the book.
The next revision pass depends on what the comments are and what my thoughts are. There might be structural things, there might be just polishing and tightening, there might be worldbuilding to solidify or subplots to tweak. I have my views on what the book needs right now and I'm waiting to see what else the readers see that I just can't. So while I wait, now that I have some comments, I'm going to do some revision prep:
1. Do the first draft of the synopsis and a scene outline. This gets the "what happens" back in my head and shows me the POV balance and timeline.
2. Play with the soundtrack some more. The muse is still happy with the collage, so apparently I nailed that early on this time.
3. Do some braindumping/free writing about the comments and my concerns to see what turns up.
4. Whatever else the muse tells me to (look for images, watch certain films or tv shows.
5. Possibly bore people who gave me comments with questions and discussions.
Then I'll do the next pass (and probably start to hate the book again and whine a lot) and it will go back to Miriam. Hopefully she won't want another pass but you never know. If she does then, it'll be lather, rinse, repeat until I get it right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)