# My Editing List



## BWFoster78 (Jul 19, 2012)

This following is mainly written to help me focus my thoughts, but it may help someone.

*Step 1 - Scene Editing*

First, read the scene through and edit for flow and readability.  

1.	Don’t use the same word or phrase three times in a short space or twice in a sentence/consecutive sentences.  If you do utilize it twice in quick succession, spread out further instances.

2.	Don’t start more than one sentence in a paragraph, or start consecutive paragraphs, with the same word.

3.	Vary length, style, and form of sentences.

4.	Can you get rid of a speech tag by adding an action or indicate who is speaking in some other manner?

Second, read the scene through again and check for the following macro items (ideally, you’d probably be better off switching the order of these reading since you’ll be correcting stuff on the first go around that may be deleted, but I can’t seem to read a scene without correcting that other stuff first.):

1.	Check for vignettes – A scene must do all the following or be deleted (from Make a Scene by Jordan Rosenfeld):

a.	Introduce new information
b.	Relate to the significant situation
c.	Build upon last scene
d.	Involve, inform, or affect the protagonist
e.	Make the reader feel more clued in
f.	Move forward in time

2.	Each scene needs to have:

a.	A protagonist with a goal
b.	Opposition to the protagonist reaching the goal

3.	Set the scene – Did you give the reader enough details to visualize the setting?  Establish time, place, circumstance, and viewpoint character.

4.	Consider physical limitations - Check to make sure that your characters can do what you’re saying they do.  If it’s a dark room, how does the POV character see his friend nod his head?

5.	Use motivation-reaction units (from Techniques of a Selling Writer by Swain)

a.	Character receives motivating stimulus
b.	The change (ie motivating stimulus) causes a change in the character’s state of mind
c.	The feeling caused by the change in state of mind result in observable reaction

6.	Check character reaction order (from Techniques of a Selling Writer by Swain)

a.	Character feels
b.	Character acts
c.	Character thinks or speaks

7.	Check if scene is too flat (from Techniques of a Selling Writer by Swain)

a.	The goal isn’t well defined
b.	The character is too weak
c.	There’s no urgency
d.	The opposition isn’t clear
e.	The opposition is too weak
f.	The scene is too trivial
g.	The scene is monotonous
h.	The disaster isn’t big enough or doesn’t make sense

Third, keep going back through the scene until you’ve made no macro changes and only minor edits for flow and readability.

*Step 2 - Line Editing*

Start by reading the last sentence in your scene.  Check for all the items below.  Then move to the next to last line.  Keep going until you reach the first sentence.

1.	Get rid of all of the words you don’t need.
1.	Eliminate all of the unnecessary words.
1.	Eliminate unnecessary words.

2.	Grammar 

a.	Punctuation
b.	Misplaced modifiers
c.	Pronoun confusion

3.	Examine use of the following words: was, very, just, could, had, that, looked, begin/start, a little, and any adverb.

a.	Was – 

i.	Are you being passive?
ii.	Are you telling?

b.	Very – Delete it unless you’ve got a very good reason to use it.
c.	Just – Fine as an adjective, try to delete if an adverb
d.	Could – This word is weak.
e.	Had – This word removes the reader even further from the time of the action. 
f.	That – Often times, this word can be removed without impacting the meaning or clarity of the sentence, though sometimes a modification to the verb form is needed.
g.	Looked – This word tends to be overused.
h.	Begin/start – If you have “he began to run” or “he started to run,” consider “he ran.”
i.	A little (or a bit) – Using these words a little seems okay, but they’re unnecessary.
j.	Adverbs

i.	Generally, Try not to use overly these words unless absolutely needed.
ii.	Check if removing them impacts the meaning of the sentence.
iii.	Check if the adverb is indicating you’re telling when you should be showing.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jul 19, 2012)

Very good guidelines!


----------



## Zophos (Jul 19, 2012)

Good list. 

Thanks.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 19, 2012)

Feel free to add.


----------



## Zophos (Jul 19, 2012)

Alright.

2.3.j.iv Find every adverb and figure out why I think the word it modifies "needs" it.  Was it necessary?  Was I being lazy?  What other word succinctly quantifies both the adverb and the word it modifies?
2.3.j.v Ignore dialogue.

Count the number of times I said "he said"/"she said" and find a little sliver of action to insert in the dialogue or a little sliver of action to insert in the leader to replace them. 

Deep dive your dialogue. Go back and figure out who said what to whom.  Was their diction, vocabulary and choice of idiom appropriate to their education, station and perspective.

Review the point of view in descriptive phrases.  If you weren't writing in 3P-omniscient, was every description aligned with the POV character and their attitudes and dispositions, or was it an author inject?  If you were writing in 3P-omniscient, did you really mean to spill your guts and give away all the secrets of your story by describing instead of painting a picture for your reader and letting them figure things out for themselves?


----------



## Penpilot (Jul 19, 2012)

Good stuff BW. Pretty much in synch with what I try to do. For me, I like to call it Top-Down editing, starting from the big picture and moving down to the little stuff. Comes from my Comp-Sci background. Any way, Tomayto-Tomahto.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 19, 2012)

Zophos,

I've heard it said many times that: "It's dialogue.  The rules don't apply."



> 2.3.j.v Ignore dialogue.



Dialogue is still part of your writing.  You need to take into account the person speaking, but, if what you're writing is distracting and doesn't flow well, it's bad whether it's in dialogue or not.


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 19, 2012)

This would make for an interesting topic...sort of an organic v. mechanistic way of approaching writing. I wonder how much a technical background influences this? For some, it seems editing involves a fairly rigorous, stepwise exercise. Even the writing process itself may be similar: X+y+z=desired effect. For others, the whole thing is more organic and less structured. Neither way it right or wrong, I just find it fascinating to learn how various people approach problems.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 19, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> This would make for an interesting topic...sort of an organic v. mechanistic way of approaching writing. I wonder how much a technical background influences this? For some, it seems editing involves a fairly rigorous, stepwise exercise. Even the writing process itself may be similar: X+y+z=desired effect. For others, the whole thing is more organic and less structured. Neither way it right or wrong, I just find it fascinating to learn how various people approach problems.



College pretty much drilled this way of thinking into me, and I think I was inclined to go that way naturally anyway.  Otherwise, I wouldn't have chosen engineering.


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 19, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> College pretty much drilled this way of thinking into me, and I think I was inclined to go that way naturally anyway.  Otherwise, I wouldn't have chosen engineering.



Yes. It is not my normal style, and I had to adapt to it when I was involved in science. Since then, it has served me well as I basically write technical documents all day and spend a lot of time working with engineers. It hasn't translated so much into my fiction writing, though. Maybe I should give that approach a shot and see what I end up with.


----------



## Lorna (Jul 19, 2012)

I found some of this really helpful. 



> Check for vignettes — A scene must do all the following or be deleted (from Make a Scene by Jordan Rosenfeld):
> 
> a. Introduce new information
> b. Relate to the significant situation
> ...





> 3. Set the scene — Did you give the reader enough details to visualize the setting? Establish time, place, circumstance, and viewpoint character.
> 
> 4. Consider physical limitations - Check to make sure that your characters can do what you’re saying they do. If it’s a dark room, how does the POV character see his friend nod his head?



Plus the overused words. 

But, you actually do this? Plus have taken the time to do so much research into all these different methods? How much has this detracted from writing time? (I recall school days when I used to sit writing revision time tables and never doing any revision). I guess it could become like that if taken too far. 

My 'education' in writing has come completely from reading, writing and listening to the comments of others. I studied literary criticism and got fed up of seeing works full of heart and soul torn apart. I think analysis is useful up to a point. But it also tears things apart. Undo one thing and everything unravels. Then you're left with resewing the big mess back together again. Sometimes it comes back stronger. And over times it's kind of like a dancing corpse.


----------



## Penpilot (Jul 19, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> This would make for an interesting topic...sort of an organic v. mechanistic way of approaching writing. I wonder how much a technical background influences this? For some, it seems editing involves a fairly rigorous, stepwise exercise. Even the writing process itself may be similar: X+y+z=desired effect. For others, the whole thing is more organic and less structured. Neither way it right or wrong, I just find it fascinating to learn how various people approach problems.



It's a funny thing. In my head I liken writing, outlining, and flow of a story to that of a piece of software. There are patterns to stories just like there are design patterns to software. There are components/procedures that take data as input, transform the data, and return it. For me the input for story is the character, the world, and the plot and the components are the scenes.


----------



## JenB (Jul 19, 2012)

ing.... oh how I loved my ing's


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 19, 2012)

Lorna said:
			
		

> But, you actually do this? Plus have taken the time to do so much research into all these different methods? How much has this detracted from writing time? (I recall school days when I used to sit writing revision time tables and never doing any revision). I guess it could become like that if taken too far.



Yes, sometimes it can be taken too far if all you ever do is read about how to write. However, I have spent a lot of time reading about the craft of writing. Trying to put what you "think" you learned into action and employing a technique is where you really learn how to do it though. I've found that method very productive.

The only way to learn how to write is through actual writing, yet studying how other, successful authors approach the craft has proved invaluable to me. At the least, it's probably saved me tons of time struggling through weaker writing by allowing me to learn from their mistakes & triumphs, applying what works for me as I refine my voice.

*** apologize for this minor hijack.

Nice list BW.... Very similar to hat I do in revision.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 19, 2012)

Lorna said:


> I found some of this really helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Lorna,

I spent about 11 years reading books about writing before I put e-pen to e-paper so to speak.  

Not the path I'd recommend for anyone else, but it does have its advantages.

This is the process I follow.  It's meant to be a quick "checklist" to help me remember what I'm checking for during editing.

Thanks for the comment.

EDIT: There was a quote by HG Wells that, I think, informed my writing from an early age (I don't recall the exact wording, but this is the sentiment):  I'm not trying to create art.  I'd rather be called a journalist than an artist.


----------



## ThinkerX (Jul 19, 2012)

Mostly, I try to avoid having the word processor underline words and phrases in green (it currently underlines passive voice stuff as well).  I don't always agree with it.

But as to the OP, given the rigidity of the rules and some of the toys out there...gotta wonder how long it will be until we get:

'FANTASY EPIC'

by

'A Computer'


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 19, 2012)

ThinkerX said:


> Mostly, I try to avoid having the word processor underline words and phrases in green (it currently underlines passive voice stuff as well).  I don't always agree with it.
> 
> But as to the OP, given the rigidity of the rules and some of the toys out there...gotta wonder how long it will be until we get:
> 
> ...



Don't knock it 'til you read it.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Jul 19, 2012)

Thanks for this guide.  It helps to set a structure to what I hope people are already doing.

Sure, what good is it if you can turn out four 100k word novels a year if you have to spend six months editing each one because you are a sloppy editor?

I think this is a good guide for people who, like me, need to fine-tune their editing process.  Oh, if only there was an easier way...

The only thing I'd like to add to the list is perhaps relating to the "telling" passages.  You know, the ones where you have to describe setting or something.  

Every time I go to a rough draft and see things like:

The cold winter wind picked up dust from the streets, flooding the marketplace with dust.- yeah I Know, but it happens when you are writing fast.

I like to look at that paragraph/ description and change it until it says what I want it to say:

Dust hung thick in the marketplace, stirred up by the blustery wind.  Tanya squinted her watery eyes, trying to read the signs on the shop ahead of her.

And relating to that, every time I see a paragraph like this:

It was raining. Fat, heavy drops pelted the travelers as they rode through the forest.  Bare trees edged in melting snow stood on both sides of the narrow road.  The horses' hooves were the only sound, cutting the stillness of the forest like a knife.

I change it to this:

The melodic clip-clop of eight horses was joined by a chorus of rain, pelting the riders as they made their way through an overgrown forest, stripped bare by the coming of winter.  While warmer weather after a week of snow was welcome, the path was reduced to a muddy mess and it only appeared to be getting worse.  They would have to camp early if they wanted to dry their clothes before dark, and that would mean an extra day on the road. 

 not perfect, but at least it gives some pertinence to the characters rather than just a weather update to the reader.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 19, 2012)

Caged,

I agree completely.

I also tend to think that "it was raining" is perfectly acceptable for a rough draft.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Jul 20, 2012)

I do too, but i try to put my best foot forward when I edit, and consider where I need to write a little more detail and where I like to keep it simple.  I have a big problem with balancing things, and I might do a sort of checklist of my own for my particular weaknesses just to make the job easier.  I hate using the same sorts of descriptions too frequently, but sometimes it gets late and I get tired and just revert to "it was raining" and plan to come back to it.


----------



## Ravana (Jul 20, 2012)

Step 3: Read your story backward, one paragraph at a time. No, I'm _not_ kidding. It's amazing what you'll catch by not reading it forward—in particular, you're more likely to notice when something is out of sequence. But even more basic items such as grammar and spelling will pop out better if you aren't caught up in the flow of the story, and are working with a background mental picture of what you know is _supposed_ to be there. (In fact, the best way to catch spelling is to read backward one word at a time. Well, the second best way: the best—for catching anything—is to have someone else read it.)

Another technique I've had recommended, though rarely used (some may wish it otherwise…  ), is to cross out every other word, then go back and re-insert only those words needed to make what's left grammatical. It isn't the most fun thing to do, but you can learn a _lot_ about your writing that way.


----------



## Zophos (Jul 20, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> Zophos,
> 
> I've heard it said many times that: "It's dialogue.  The rules don't apply."
> 
> Dialogue is still part of your writing.  You need to take into account the person speaking, but, if what you're writing is distracting and doesn't flow well, it's bad whether it's in dialogue or not.



Good point, but that's more of a POV exercise than a grammatical or structural one. Your character should say whatever it is they would say. The grammar, voice, and admonishment don't matter, so long as it's genuine to that character.

That certainly doesn't make the task any less vital or any less difficult. The hardest thing to do IMO is not let what "you" say encroach on what "they" say.



Penpilot said:


> It's a funny thing. In my head I liken writing, outlining, and flow of a story to that of a piece of software. There are patterns to stories just like there are design patterns to software. There are components/procedures that take data as input, transform the data, and return it. For me the input for story is the character, the world, and the plot and the components are the scenes.



I have exactly the same experience. I've written software long enough that my methods for debugging it have trickled over to my writing. I don't know if that's good, bad or otherwise, but it's just the way I approach things. Troubleshooting logic is probably the most prominent similarity, followed by sequence and then mechanics. I definitely approach it from a "what is code/what is comment" perspective. If I can identify only the most basic, compact (or perhaps efficient) and straight-forward portions of a clause/sentence/paragraph/page/story and cut out all the comments, I find that it strengthens the writing. Kind of boils down to cutting out the fluff, but boy do I like fluff.

Edit re fluff: The most intriguing dynamic is how my professional correspondence has changed. When I write an email these days, it's a bevvy of "just the facts, Ma'am" clauses strung together because nobody really reads emails anymore, anyway. 

"Task complete; system restored. Performed A and B; continuing with C. Anticipate no production impact."


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 20, 2012)

Zophos,

I disagree completely with your statement.



> Good point, but that's more of a POV exercise than a grammatical or structural one. Your character should say whatever it is they would say. The grammar, voice, and admonishment don't matter, so long as it's genuine to that character.



I have this problem with a friend who likes using dialect, stuttering, and lisps in his dialogue.  It's distracting.  It takes the reader out of the story and makes them see the writing.

You definitely should tailor the dialogue to the character, and I agree that you can be more lenient when it comes to grammar, etc with people talking.  To say that _The grammar, voice, and admonishment don't matter, so long as it's genuine to that character_ doesn't make sense to me.  I've worked hard throughout my entire piece to draw the reader in.  Now that I'm doing dialogue, I can throw all that hard work out the window?


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 20, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> I have this problem with a friend who likes using dialect, stuttering, and lisps in his dialogue.  It's distracting.  It takes the reader out of the story and makes them see the writing.



It may not work for you (and use of things like dialect does tend to be disfavored these days), but this sort of thing can be used in dialogue. I wouldn't assume that it is no longer hard work. Take a look at a book like Trainspotting, for example, which makes heavy use of dialect. I think Welsh demonstrates in that book that rules regarding grammar, spelling, and the like can be discarded in dialogue. The author has to be careful in doing this, in my view, because if they don't have the skill to do it the end result can be a mess. I feel that if an author wants to go down that path, it is worth a try. If it works, great. If not, then you've got to go back and fix it.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 20, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> It may not work for you (and use of things like dialect does tend to be disfavored these days), but this sort of thing can be used in dialogue. I wouldn't assume that it is no longer hard work. Take a look at a book like Trainspotting, for example, which makes heavy use of dialect. I think Welsh demonstrates in that book that rules regarding grammar, spelling, and the like can be discarded in dialogue. The author has to be careful in doing this, in my view, because if they don't have the skill to do it the end result can be a mess. I feel that if an author wants to go down that path, it is worth a try. If it works, great. If not, then you've got to go back and fix it.



But the key is: they have to do it well, not throw out all the rules.  If you're going to add dialect and use other potentially distracting techniques, you need to do more work to make sure you're doing it right.


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 20, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> But the key is: they have to do it well, not throw out all the rules.  If you're going to add dialect and use other potentially distracting techniques, you need to do more work to make sure you're doing it right.



Yes, I think that's exactly right. Breaking the "rules" is generally going to be harder than following them, in my view. You've got to know exactly what you're doing or you'll end up with a mess on your hands. Even in Welsh's case, where I think he knew what he was doing and did it effectively, I suspect there were readers who found parts of the book impenetrable, or just simply hated it. Some readers will be more forgiving than others; some may actually like it.

I like writing that calls attention to itself if it is done very well (e.g. _Lolita_).


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 20, 2012)

I think The Help is a good example.  Usually, I hate dialect with a purple passion, but the use in that book really enhanced it.


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 20, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> I think The Help is a good example.  Usually, I hate dialect with a purple passion, but the use in that book really enhanced it.



That is one I haven't read. I'll have to take a look at it. I though the use of dialogue and slang was good in _A Clockwork Orange_.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 20, 2012)

Ravana said:
			
		

> Step 3: Read your story backward, one paragraph at a time. No, I'm not kidding. It's amazing what you'll catch by not reading it forward--in particular, you're more likely to notice when something is out of sequence. But even more basic items such as grammar and spelling will pop out better if you aren't caught up in the flow of the story, and are working with a background mental picture of what you know is supposed to be there. (In fact, the best way to catch spelling is to read backward one word at a time. Well, the second best way: the best--for catching anything--is to have someone else read it.)
> 
> Another technique I've had recommended, though rarely used (some may wish it otherwise...  ), is to cross out every other word, then go back and re-insert only those words needed to make what's left grammatical. It isn't the most fun thing to do, but you can learn a lot about your writing that way.



Ravana, 

I love this idea. I've never done it before but it makes a lot of sense.

Definitely going to give it a whirl!


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 20, 2012)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> Ravana,
> 
> I love this idea. I've never done it before but it makes a lot of sense.
> 
> Definitely going to give it a whirl!



Yeah, it is definitely worth trying. I've done this before as well.


----------



## Zophos (Jul 20, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> Zophos,
> 
> I disagree completely with your statement.
> 
> ...



Completely agree that your dialogue should not disengage your reader. Shakespeare, the master of dialogue, seldom stooped to tricks and stunts to pull off the most amazing prosodic verse ever written.  He wrote nothing but dialogue (with the occassional enter and exeunt) and still managed to paint a clear picture of the "way" his characters said things, yet never painted himself into a corner of rules restricting the authenticity of his characters. 

I'm not saying that your character's diction, stuttering, mumbling, diction, accent, speech impediment, and did I mention diction? should ever be spelled out in your work with myriad ellipses and words that slow the pace of reading through devices like eye-dialect spelling or the overuse of contractions. Thinking that an educated noble and an ignorant villein, a verbose pulpiteer and a cut-to-the-quick pragmatist, or even a northerner and a southerner would form a sentence in exactly the same fashion and follow a set of rules about adverbial clauses and prepositional phrases lacks authenticity, however.

Dialogue affords a primacy of characterization (a front row seat, if you will) that few other vehicles provide.  I agree that it can be overdone, but I believe that author injects and vicariousness can sully a work just as easily by rendering it flat and colorless.


Fascinating disussion, BTW.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 20, 2012)

Zophos,

I understand.

I've just had the argument, usually ending with me failing to convince anyone, too many times when someone says: you don't have to pay any attention to rules when it's dialogue.

Thanks for the comments.


----------



## Zophos (Jul 20, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> Zophos,
> 
> I understand.
> 
> ...



No worries, my friend. I completely understand what you are saying and I hate "Me Tarzan, you Jane" dialogue.


----------



## korabas (Jul 23, 2012)

Oooh, thanks for this, good tips!


----------

