Preparing for publication: polishing the manuscript

[Chilari]

So the thread about not hiring an editor is perhaps a little confrontational. What I want to see discussed is how to make a manuscript as good as it can be before publication or sending to an agent, etc.

Getting eyes on the manuscript - getting beta readers to give feedback is important. But how do you get the best feedback? What other means are there to improve your manuscript? How many rounds of editing is enough? How do you structure editing for best effect?

 

[Chessie]

One thing I would love to see mentioned here would be how to choose good beta readers. What are some things to look for?

 

[GeekDavid]

One thing I would love to see mentioned here would be how to choose good beta readers. What are some things to look for?

Above all, they need to love the genre. You're not likely to get a good review from someone who thinks Harry Potter is the work of the devil.

 

[PaulineMRoss]

What other means are there to improve your manuscript?

Online critique groups are a good way to get a variety of feedback. You get random strangers looking at your work, for a start, and since they mostly work on the credit principle (you critique other people's work to get critiques in return), the exercise of critiquing is valuable practice for editing your own work.

The two big downsides are: firstly, it's time-consuming to critique other people's work, time that could be spent writing; and secondly, the quality of critiques you get in return is variable.

I recommend Scribophile, which is where I go when I wear my writer's hat (which I don't do here). The website is brilliant, and the system is set up so that you can ultimately post an entire novel, chapter by chapter.

Website: Writing group and online writing workshop for serious writers | Scribophile

 

[Devor]

I think if you're pressed on cash, the best thing you can do is learn before you write. Get as much feedback as you can on a few chapters, maybe an outline, and incorporate that feedback into your writing going forward. Most of the time you're making very similar mistakes repeatedly, so if you can learn what those are and hedge them off early, you're in strong shape.

 

[BWFoster78]

Learn to ask the right questions of your work. Edit with an eye toward:

What is the source of tension in this scene?
What story purpose does this scene serve?
Is the scene focused tightly on its purpose?
How does the scene advance the plot and reveal character?
What are you revealing about the character's emotions and motivations through description and action?
Is there a better way to show what you're telling?

Etc.

I think the average beta reader, even the good ones, tend to focus on making what has been written better. I think the good editors focus on, "Should this scene/chapter been written at all?"

 

[Philip Overby]

But how do you get the best feedback?

Each writer is going to have things they want to focus on the most. It's always good to ask critique partners to hammer on those parts you're having the most trouble with. The best way to avoid major issues is to make sure your writing is clean before giving it over to a reader. If you give someone something sloppy, they're going to focus on that aspect instead of the actual content.

I think what BW wrote above is good advice, but some of it almost feels too "industry". If you're not dealing with professional writers, then asking questions like "Do you like this character? Why or why not?" or "Can you follow the plot?" seem more appropriate. These are more layman ways to ask questions because your beta reader isn't necessarily always going to be a writer.

What other means are there to improve your manuscript?

I mentioned the Scene-Sequel approach in the other thread, but I guess it got glossed over with all the chaos.

I find this is a good way to see if your novel is doing what it should. It gives each scene a goal, a conflict, and a disaster. After that, it gives a reaction, dilemma, and decision. Of course not every scene has to follow this pattern, but if you see that most of your scenes are doing this kind of work, it should solve a lot of issues with tension or making sure the scenes are doing the most work. For example:

1. Goal: Marko wants to kill the basilisk.
2. Conflict: His mother won't let him go outside.
3. Disaster: The basilisk crashes into his house and traps them all inside.

1. Reaction: Marko panics and runs around the house looking for his sword.
2. Dilemma: He can't find his sword.
3. Decision: He decides he's going to punch the basilisk instead.

So just from this small part, we learn that:

a. Marko is kind of scatterbrained.
b. He is also dangerously courageous (punching a basilisk is probably not a good idea)
c. He is trapped inside the house with his family who he wants to protect.
d. His short term goal is to kill the basilisk. Maybe his long term goal is revealed as well, he wants to become a famous adventurer, but his mother won't allow him. He honors his mother, so he wants to make sure she can trust his abilities first.

So from just two short parts, I think we know a good deal about Marko already and what he has in store. I think utilizing this kind of structure can help a lot towards making sure each scene means something and improves your manuscript before giving it over to someone else to read. If you haven't tried this before, just give it a try and see if it works for you. Couldn't hurt!

How many rounds of editing is enough?

Most people are going to say "When it's finished" but I feel like that's not really the answer anyone wants. I think editing is one of the more difficult parts of writing, that's why some people want to pay others to do it for them. It's hard to work out all the kinks and can often take someone dozens of edits before they're happy. In order to avoid constant editing, you could try Caged Maiden's technique and see if it works. She posted an article about it a while back. Target Editing - A Time-Saving Strategy for Writers

If that approach doesn't work, then I'd suggest giving yourself a deadline. "This will go through its final edit on March 31st" or something like that. One thing about pro writers is that they get to a point where they are happy and then send it off. You can't clutch to it forever.

Or you can go with the normal advice "Edit until it's ready" which is pretty vague and not really that helpful for me, honestly. That's why editing is often a contentious topic because not many people really know much about it or even care to. However, editing is as much of the creative process as a rough draft is.

How do you structure editing for best effect?

I like Caged Maiden's approach from the article I posted. It's a way to hit each individual issue that a manuscript has one part at a time instead of diving into the whole thing and coming out with a massive headache.

One thing I used to do with writing (which others don't like, but oh well) is a sort of bare bones draft. Meaning there's very little description, very little world-building, just basically people talking. Then, when it's finished, I go back and put another coat on it (description, world-building, etc.) Then, I go back and put another coat on it (characterization, tighten up dialogue, etc.) Once that is all finished, then I go through with Caged Maiden's system. I believe this works for me personally. It may not work for others, but I finish more and more short stories that way.

Hope any or all of this helps.

 

[BWFoster78]

I think what BW wrote above is good advice, but some of it almost feels too "industry".

I wasn't very clear. Sorry. (Had my three year old saying, "want to type, Daddy" at the time).

I was more suggesting that these are questions that the author needs to learn to ask and answer for themselves rather than asking it of beta readers.

 

[Chessie]

Phillip, I really like the scene sequel approach. I'm going to give that a try. Also, would you mind posting a link to Caged Maiden's system or explaining it for us? Thank you very much.

Edit: Nevermind I see it there.

 

[Philip Overby]

Got lost in the shuffle in the other thread, but if you're interested in exploring the Scene-Sequel technique (which I originally saw on Jim Butcher's Live Journal) here are some links about it. If you're new to writing, it's not a bad idea to check it out.

Writing The Perfect Scene: Advanced Fiction Writing Tips

The first five pages of your manuscript

Jim Butcher's way of explaining them is a bit more entertaining IMO.

jimbutcher: SCENES

jimbutcher: SEQUELS

I don't live or die by this method, but I do think it helps when I'm struggling to make sure if a scene is working to the best of its ability and it's not just there taking up space or wasting the reader's time.

 

[Xitra_Blud]

Online critique groups are a good way to get a variety of feedback. You get random strangers looking at your work, for a start, and since they mostly work on the credit principle (you critique other people's work to get critiques in return), the exercise of critiquing is valuable practice for editing your own work.

The two big downsides are: firstly, it's time-consuming to critique other people's work, time that could be spent writing; and secondly, the quality of critiques you get in return is variable.

I recommend Scribophile, which is where I go when I wear my writer's hat (which I don't do here). The website is brilliant, and the system is set up so that you can ultimately post an entire novel, chapter by chapter.

Website: Writing group and online writing workshop for serious writers | Scribophile

I agree with this. Critique groups are really good. If you can find one outside the internet, I highly recommend going to it. I go to one every other Thursday and we look at each others work and give honest opinions. It has really helped me to grow as a writer and it has also disciplined me as a writer as well. Before, I had writer ADD in which I used to get started on something and then, after about ten chapters, put it down due to being distracted by another story or just getting lazy. The group really helped me because we decided that we'd work on one story at a time and we have a deadline for when it needs to be turned in so it helps me complete my work.

 

[Chessie]

I haven't had a positive experience with online crit groups. I've tried a couple and I haven't received anything I could grow from except "dragons don't exist". I definitely think in person crit groups are much nicer and work well. I agree in that it has helped me be more disciplined about my writing.

Far as preparing for publication, I think continuing to learn about the craft is a good idea. I like to read about other writers and playing with different suggestions. It all helps.

 

[PaulineMRoss]

I haven't had a positive experience with online crit groups. I've tried a couple and I haven't received anything I could grow from except "dragons don't exist".

Yeah, it helps to have critiques from people who understand fantasy I think every system has its drawbacks, and you can get bad advice online and in person. I don't have the option of a local group, so online is all I have, but it works for me. I've learned more in a few weeks of critting and being critted on Scribophile than a year's worth of reading about writing.

 

[Philip Overby]

So you recommend Scribophile, Pauline? I was a member of Critters a while back and it was just too much to keep up with. I may join another critique group in the distant future, but I decided it's best now for me to focus on finishing something before I need anyone to crit something in progress (which is the mistake I made in the past).

 

[C Hollis]

I re-worked my writing process after my first novel, and it has worked so well for me, that I often toy with the idea of revisiting the first one to put it through this strainer. When I complete step seven, the book is done.

My process of writing a book is thus:

1. Write rough draft (brain purge)
What it says. All my errant thoughts get thrown at the keyboard.

2. First edit (pencil edits)
I print off the manuscript and try to make the mess gel.

3. Second edit (checklist edits)
I have a checklist of items I look for one at a time. For example: I will read the manuscript looking for opportunities where narrative would work better as a scene. I will read again and look at dialogue mechanics. I'll read another time with an eye on the pace of the story. With each read, I focus on one item. All in all, I read the thing twelve times and it looks like an ill-fated high school term paper by the time I'm finished.

4. Third edit (copy/software edits)
I know many of you will cringe at the thought of using software in editing; get over it, I'm a programmer. I treat the software much like I treat a beta reader/editor; I ignore it when I think it's being silly.

5. Pass off to beta readers (evil hackers)
I've been working with the same three people for a couple of years now. They know me, and aren't afraid to hit me over the head. One of them is NOT a fantasy reader. My work is the only fantasy she ever reads, and she provides me with invaluable feedback. If she ever backed out, I would actively seek out another person who doesn't like fantasy.

6. Fourth edit (appeasing the evil hackers)
I will take the reams of tattered paper left behind by the readers and filter through it all. After I finish ignoring them (kidding), I will give the manuscript one more read.

7. Final edit (copy/software edits part 2)
I run it through the software strainer one last time. I ignore most of it on this turn, but there is always that nugget it spews out that causes me to think about a sentence and make improvements.

The structure of this keeps me from doing one of two things: Publishing before it is done, or never publishing because I'm too busy editing my way to glory.

 

[PaulineMRoss]

So you recommend Scribophile, Pauline? I was a member of Critters a while back and it was just too much to keep up with. I may join another critique group in the distant future, but I decided it's best now for me to focus on finishing something before I need anyone to crit something in progress (which is the mistake I made in the past).

I like Scribophile, it works for me. Lots of fantasy people there, so no one bats an eye at dragons or werewolves or whatever. Well, not many people. It does work best when you've got something to post.

I had a look at Critters, but the email-based format was horrible, and it's time-dependent, so you *have* to crit regularly or your own work goes bumping to the bottom of the waiting list.

Scribophile isn't like that. You crit for other people to build up 'karma' (points), then you pay karma to post your own work. You can crit as and when you want, you can choose the kind of work you want to crit, and you can go quiet for a while to focus on the writing, or you can crit like mad to build up karma and then post a bunch of stuff at once. And the website's brilliant, very well structured, so you can do inline crits, template or freeform. Like any online community, it's got its proportion of pedants and snobs, but mostly they're a nice bunch of people.

 

[Philip Overby]

@Pauline Well, what would the internet be without pedants and snobs?

I like the idea of Scribophile. It sounds like it allows you to crit when you want instead of following any sort of schedule. I guess that's what I've always had problems with is keeping up with a schedule. It works for me sometimes, but other times it's rough going.

The Critters email system drove me nuts, by the way. And it's almost impossible to deactivate it seemed. Finally, I just forwarded all the Critter mail to another address because it was cluttering up my mail box.

@CHollis I dig your approach to getting your work polished. It seems pretty straightforward and practical. I have a couple of methods I like, but yours might be a new way to go for me.

 

[yachtcaptcolby]

Corner each of your beta readers in a bar or a coffee shop and actually talk to them. I find I get much better feedback in person than I do electronically.

 

[GeekDavid]

Corner each of your beta readers in a bar or a coffee shop and actually talk to them. I find I get much better feedback in person than I do electronically.

If you're gonna do it in a bar, get the feedback before the bottle is empty.

 

[Telcontar]

I was also a member of Critters, and was active for several years. The email approach didn't bother me too much, but eventually the website itself went off the rails and the quality of the critiques seemed to drop off, so I stopped bothering with it. I'll have to check out Scribophile.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this particular technique yet, because I personally swear by it as one of the best ways to spot typos and clunky writing.

Read your work out loud.

Read it Out Loud.

OUT LOUD.



Seriously, when editing your work and attempting to go through it thoroughly, this is one of the best things you can do to help it. If you are reading it out loud as if you were reading to somebody else, you're forced to say every word. Makes it much much easier to spot typos. If you enjoy spoken word performance like I do, it also helps clarify sentence structure and such if you end up tripping over how to read a certain sentence to an audience.

Once the story has cleared its final substantive rewrite, I do at least three editing passes on all work I intend for publication, and so far I have a pretty good record on keeping typos out of the finished product.

1) Normal. Read through in your head, fix typos and so on. Attempt to do it thoroughly.
2) Out loud, spoken. Read the work out loud but without any attempt at hamming it up. This is a typo-busting run.
3) Out loud, performed. Read through as if you had an audience. This is still great for finding typos but can also help with sentence structure, dialogue, etc.

Sometimes I switch around 2 and 3 because it is arguably smarter to save the main typo-busting run for last, when you don't intend to actually change much else. However the progression feels more natural to me in this order and - as long as you are doing the read-throughs thoroughly and honesty - it shouldn't matter much.