Wow, aparently I take a much longer approach than everyone else. I print off the first draft and read through making notes in red pen, put it away for a few weeks. Then I start writing the story again from scratch keeping the noted first draft next to me going through it as I write. I'll then usually do the same again but the third draft might have a little bit of cutting and pasting if there's anything I'm particularly proud of.
This is essentially what I do. It makes it easier to work in chunks because you can measure your progress. I have each chapter as its own folder and within each folder I have an "archived" folder where I put all my done drafts. Each time I make a new edit of the document, I save a new copy of it and date the old one before putting it into the archived folder. That way I have every draft in case I need to go back and re-add something I took out or (god forbid) prove in court that someone stole my stuff.
Ha. You ninja'd me. I basically just explained that exact thing. If you like being able to mark up your drafts (like I do), you might do well to invest in an iPad if you don't already have one. There is a wonderful app I use on mine called iAnnotate. You just save your drafts as PDF files and you can use the tools on the app to mark them up in the exact same way you could on the paper. I find it very convenient because it not only saves paper, but you can carry your entire manuscript around without the weight.
Well, during my first draft, I make about a million "comments" in my document as I'm writing about things I'm too lazy to change right then. Things like "Go back and foreshadow this," or "Look this up in wikipedia." Step 1) I go through all of those comments. Step 2) I print it out, read it out loud to myself, and mark it up in red pen. (You catch a lot more mistakes with it printed out, and even more if you read it out loud.) Step 3) Make red-pen changes in my document. Step 4) Rewrite it in a new document while reading the old one. (This is to make sure the story flows after the millions of changes I just made)
I have read recently that any work sent to a publisher should be given twelve drafts before it is submitted. And each draft should concentrate on one aspect of the writing. Apart from the obvious: sentence structure, plot, dialogue, word choice, grammar, spelling, tenses, etc., does anyone know what the others could be? Unfortunately the article didn't elaborate on what the other seven were. I have been googling and searching online for the answer but I keep seeing the same answers cropping up (the one's I have mentioned above) Could anyone help identify what the others are?
I think the idea of editing a piece several times and focussing particularly on a different aspect each time is a sound one. Quite where the number twelve came from I have no idea. I wouldn't take it at absolute face value - do as many edits as the piece needs, not a set number chosen from an article on the internet.
This is hokum. Nonsense. In a word, bullshit. Whoever wrote that article was just looking for a quick buck, and figured that sounding like a writing expert was a good way of getting one. I'm starting to think that some of these articles and books on writing are written to scare people away from writing so there's less competition. If you tell someone they can't submit a piece until they've written twelve drafts, you're making it sound like more work than it has to be. Articles like this are not helpful. This. I agree with this.
I've notice that the five or six scenes that really matter usually end-up being edited/revised a few more times than that. 'Course, at the same time there are many scenes that are fine after only a few revisions: so, I believe the point is to convince the new writer to get it through their heads that you really shouldn't submit anything for publication that has not been repeatedly, gone over with a fine tooth comb.
Millions upon millions of people talk about writing a book. Most of those people never get around to starting. Far less of those people get around to finishing the first chapter. Even less make it through the first draft. And barley any of them actually make it to the finish line: the finished manuscript. I know that there are other gut-wrenching obstacles to get through — such as finding an agent and publication — but if you are able to get your final draft done, is the worst behind you?
Even the final draft is not the final FINAL draft, as your agent/publisher will likely make their suggestions to improve it and it is then up to you whether you agree with what they say. I think the worst is actually in the middle of the novel. It's when you're likely to run out of steam. But if you keep going through that, tweaking and polishing is a little bit like adding the finishing touches to your house once it's built... you're so exciting by the prospect of finishing it, that you can really enjoy the final stages.
I would say no. I would say finding the agent is probably the most gut-wrenching, due to the rejection letters. How many people can you take, telling you that your BABY just isn't quite good enough?
First draft...submission-ready draft...querying...submission...final-proofs...publication...promotion... When is the worst behind you? Depends on what aspect you consider "the worst". For some, it's getting their thoughts organized enough to begin to write, or screwing up the courage to start putting those thoughts down "on paper", or staying the course and ignoring distractions, unexpected life changes and other roadblocks to actually finish the first draft. For any of them, completing the first draft is getting the worst behind them. Then there are those who can't change anything once it's in, or who don't have the patience to weed out each and every SPaG error and poor writing habit, can't give up all that clever dialogue even though it does nothing to advance the plot, or those lavish descriptions of the Rue d'Rivoli in the winter of 1937, because it's just sheer poetry, or admit that while Mr. Scruffles is indeed an engaging and entertaining character, he, too, must go in the bin (perhaps to be reborn in a later work) and with him the accompanying subplot. For them, getting to a submission-ready draft is the worst. Then there are those who can't summarize their work, or who haven't done the legwork to discover which agents are best suited to their project and who aren't on P&E's badguy list, or who haven't bothered to read each and every queried agent's submission guidelines. For them, querying is the worst agony. I could go on. For my dough, there is no "downhill from here" point. It's all hard work until your work is on the shelves of bookstores, and even then it's not done, because nobody's work "sells itself". Hang in there.
Rejection wouldn't be the problem for me, neither is writing the first draft. I think the gut-wrenching part is editing, especially for the second and third draft, writing the first draft is something I like to do and so is writing the final draft because... well, you're getting something done. I think the first draft is the stage where you create the story and you actually create it, the final draft is finishing what you've been working on for... probably long. I know the drafts in between are at least as important, but I often feel like I'm not being productive when I'm editting - doesn't stop me from doing it though, editing is important. I've never been to a publisher with my work, but I don't think rejection would bother me, because I write to tell a story I want to tell, not to please other people.
To be honest, I think that rejection would bother anyone who loves their writing enough to want to see it in print, and I include myself. The key is to take rejection and build from it, not let it throw you or defeat you. People are not made for defeat.
@EdFromNY you make it the whole process sound so appealing With regards to rejection, it took me a long time just to post bits and pieces here for fear of mockery or derision or just flat out rejection. Even when I see my piece for critique has 500 views but only 3 comments I start to think 497 people were to polite to say it's crap but at this point I think rejection letters from publishers or agents wouldn't hurt me that much - I'll just blame a bad query letter or imbecile screener rather than a bad or badly written story if the worst occurs. In my heart of hearts though I like to think they'll be falling over themselves for my signature!
Actually, I'm just reflecting what I've read people post here. Some of it ain't pretty. Or you could assume that 497 people were too overawed to find anything wrong with it.
Like you said, people are not made for defeat, maybe we all doubt ourselves as writers - or maybe just me...
Isn't the whole point of an agent to avoid doing the grunge work? Yet you have to do grunge work just to get an agent. Doesn't sound fair to me.
I would say the first draft is only the first step on a long journey, that does not even end with the book in the stores. So compared to all the other steps, first draft to me is by far the easiest.
The worst is behind you when you've written and published about a dozen novels. By then you should have a pretty good idea of how to tell a story without needing lots of rewrites or days of head-scratching. But, yes, completing a first draft of a novel for the first time is a pretty big milestone for most writers. The vast majority of people who 'want to be a writer' never get there.
The whole point of an agent is 1) to cut through the defenses and find an editor who is likely to be attracted to you work; 2) to negotiate your contract with the publisher and 3) to negotiate any other potential contracts, such as (dream on, why not?) film rights.
