What's the Real Reason for Revising?

[BWFoster78]

My process basically amounts to:
1) Write work.
2) Give work to beta readers.
3) Revise based on beta reader feedback. Once.
4) Get work proofread.
5) Publish or submit.

I'm not at the point where my first draft is good enough to give to beta readers. I require at least a 2nd to get to that stage. In fact, I'm not sure, given my methodology, that I'll ever get to that stage.

For me, the first draft is my thinking process put on paper. All the elements are there to make a story, but they're not cohesive. I have to put thought into the character arcs, pacing, tension, emotion, and plot elements to make the 2nd draft something that I'd even consider letting others read.

 

[Addison]

I think a good sign that you've revised the #@$#@ out of your work, either the whole thing or just one scene, is when you try to revise it but your imagination won't turn over. Faulty wiring, pressing to hard on the clutch. A sign that either you're out of juice or the scene is fine as is.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I was pleasantly surprised by some of the revision processes mentioned above. I thought I was more alone than it appears I am.
My process basically amounts to:
1) Write work.
2) Give work to beta readers.
3) Revise based on beta reader feedback. Once.
4) Get work proofread.
5) Publish or submit.

Some folks (Dean Wesley Smith, for one) recommend skipping steps two and three. I'm more comfortable getting some feedback from trusted readers still, at my stage of the game. When I do revise, I *don't* change the story, or plot, or characters. Pretty universally what I change is little bits of wording where either a) I made amateur hour errors like re-using the same word more than once in a paragraph or b) the words I used were insufficient to convey the scene as I was trying to tell it.

I HATE the old "revise over and over" meme. It's a leftover, as DWS says, from a century of English professors who didn't want to have to correct too many papers, so they taught students to revise their work to "polish" it. Thing is, I always used to get As from those professors with my first drafts, so I really never saw the point of following their directions on the subject.

I think it probably varies by author. DWS may not need to revise much because his first attempt is already fairly polished and stripped of the unnecessary (which is something that can be a natural talent and develop over time as a skill); but some authors (*cough* glances around nervously) tend to be a bit baroque and exploratory in their first drafts, and without at least one revision step, would end up publishing something bloated.

A lot of aspiring authors probably do spend a lot more time revising than is healthy; that time would be better spent analyzing story structure and character development rather than fiddling with the wording of everything. But that's haaaaaaard.

 

[SeverinR]

revising is an art of itself.
No manuscript will ever be perfect, even the block buster bok, could be improved in some way.
You want the best that it can be, then get good feedback, and consider what they say.

I have not found anyone willing to review a large book, but found alot of people will do small samplings. So when my computer is working again, and I finish this revision, I will submit a portion or a chapter for review. Then look at what they said and work on weaknesses. Remember the people reading it, took time to do you a favor, they are giving you an honest opinion so don't overly defend something or take it personally. Question them if you need to, but don't give them negitive feedback for their review.
Also maybe read someone elses submissions and give them feedback. I need to do this also, haven't done it for a while.

 

[Mari]

I don't there is magic thing anyone can tell that would let you know where revisions ends and fussing begins. That comes with experience and trust in yourself.

I personally have to revise everything I write. I tighten. I clarify. I add. I put in transitions.

I think it's when others, who you trust, who also write and read, tell you nice things and the areas where they say need you disagree with FOR A REASON. One reader doesn't care for when a phrase is repeated. I did for a reason and it doesn't seem to bother 20 readers. So it stays.

 

[Devora]

Taking too long to revise will cause one to become disinterested in the work (i speak from experience). Revision is to be used for the various reason you have stated, but be wary of how long you take. It took me 6 months to finish the short story's first draft from the rough draft i wrote that i just finished today (01/19/2013), but i still pulled through. You got to take breaks between each revision session, otherwise you'll burn yourself out.

 

[Jabrosky]

Usually I write the first few chapters of a story only to realize that there's something fundamentally flawed with my plot or characterization that ruins everything. I know this is my inner critic attacking again, but the thing is I need my stories to have solid foundations in order to stand up. Any weakness in the opening ruins the whole story for me.

 

[Addison]

A successful story is like a rocket launch. First the rocket shoots off the earth, flying at 25,000 miles an hour to break the earth's atmosphere. Then it's the journey through open space, then the landing on the moon. That beginning of the shuttle's journey is like the beginning of a story. If the rocket doesn't reach the right speed it will flounder, fall and burn in embers. If the beginning doesn't start off with enough speed, a rush, a thrill, and "Oh my gosh does he make it?!" feeling, then it's gonna fall.

I think that's why beginnings are my worst. Not to say I write them badly (least I think I don't. :-( ) but it's why I go over them very carefully.