I feel that I need a more specific definition of "first draft". By your definition, I'm not sure that all writers could even produce a first draft of an entire story, because many writers start the editing process long before the piece has reached any conclusion. Even I, who advocate against over-editing and against perfectionism while writing, will almost certainly edit early scenes long before the final scenes have been written at all. To me, a "first draft" would be a piece that has been written, has probably goine through a few editing passes, is more or less structurally sound, and (and here's where my definition comes in) my editing is no longer feeling productive. The story is getting stale from too many readings and I'm increasingly uncertain about my changes. That's the point where I'd put it away to age for at least a few hours and probably a few days or weeks, returning to it later with fresh eyes. The thing that I put away is the "first draft". When I retrieve it after those few days or weeks and make another few passes through it, then stop when it gets stale again, the product at that point will be the "second draft". Since the "first draft" comes when my own thoughts are no longer useful or productive, that does seem like the ideal time to present it to others for their thoughts.
To me, a first draft will always be a first draft even though it is polished. Since writing is rewriting, the final draft still remains a rough draft until the last reader says that it is marketable enough to be published.
I don't recommend offering up a first draft for critique. You want to know the things you cannot figure out for yourself, not the inconsequential mistakes you'll easily clean up on the first proofreading pass. Always offer up the cleanest draft you can manage. Anything else is aq waste of noth your time and that of your critiquers. And know this: When I see a writer proclaim a piece of writing for critique was something he or she threw together just before collapsing into bed (or a drunken stupor), I will nearly always skip it. Asking others to critique a half-assed effort is an insult. \
I completely agree with this. I see too many first drafts that could have major problem fixes if the person simply re-reads it outloud to themselves first. I'm in a creative writing course similar to that where we read our work aloud to the class while they follow along and make notes then after everyone has read we discuss each piece. It drives me nuts when people stumble over their own work because what they wrote doesn't make sense and the first time they realize it is while reading that first draft.
I will personally vouch for Mom's statement. However, with that said, she's very knowledgeable and I recommend learning basic writing skills for her. Don't send a goof, though, because you WILL hear about it.
But that, too, is a learning experience. Most people learn more from a mistake than from a clean attempt.
I am not exactly sure what's going on here. This thread has kind of turned into a wild tornado swirling with opinionated concepts. I will say that it irks me to high heaven when someone calls a first draft a rough draft. To me, there's a huge difference, my first draft is a piece I've edited for a day (I recently started writing new drafts each day, for five days), where as my rough draft is the first time go, with some typos and such fixed on the way, but otherwise straight through, with concepts and the story in its budding stages, characters not fully realized, events susceptable to changing. Personally, I'm not sure why it would be such a big deal to take a rough draft to a critique or reviewing venue. Sure, it's always better to get a polished piece looked at, but hey, you're fresh in the creative process, the story just came out, and the feedback and brainstorming could spark a whole new list of things, throwing your story in a whole new direction, instead of making it 3-4 drafts in and realizing the direction is all wrong. I don't think it inhibits the creative process at all, review of any kind propels the writer forward, always. I think it's a matter of pride and feeling naked, something I can relate to, something I think everyone on this website can relate to. We've all had those moments where we've showed something unfinished to someone and walked away hollow and violated, because we allowed this person a glimpse into our cavern of thought, and the darkness it sometimes holds. Here's where I differ: I will show my work to anyone, no matter what stage, fledgling or full grown, as long as they are not someone I think of as a reader. There's a difference between people who are helping you shape the piece, and people you want to read the piece recreationally, for fun, the people you are hoping to move and leave a lasting impression. The latter is the type of person I will not, ever, show my work to unless I'm confident it is as good as it can be, given my abilities.
My rough draft is just that: a rough draft. I haven't edited for typo's, etc etc because it slows my down when getting the information down. Plus, I'm too emotionally involved in the book to edit as I go, therefore I start another novel while that one rests, etc, etc.
