Write now, edit later?

One of the most interesting writing experiments I did was to keep a journal for a couple of years. I promised myself that I would not only not edit previous entries, but I wouldn't even read them. My goal was to put the writing experience totally in the present, without regard to anything that had been written previously.

Years later, I came across the journal and read it. I was struck by how much my writing style had changed, how much looser it was and how more freely it flowed, as I progressed through the pages. The experience taught me that editing while writing generally does more harm than good. So I work to get it on paper or hard drive first, as much as I can, while it's still fresh. There's time for reflection and editing later.

 

I don't work from an outline of any kind. I write one chapter at a time, page by page, editing as I go. I'm not made for writing draft grade material. When I've finished with a chapter it goes under the eagle eye of Jessica, my ever so patient editor. Only then can I move on to the next chapter.

 

When I write a big story, I try to have a story arc that I plot out on butcher paper and then write the story to roughly follow that arc. For me, having the arc pasted above my screen on the wall is a motivator and a reminder of the overall flow of the story. It gives a structure, but I'm careful not to second guess my first draft. I simply write until inspiration fails. At that stage, I might go on a light editing spree to partially correct what I've done considering what came later but also to get the momentum to pick up the story and keep going.

The primary thing is to write and have as few sticking points as possible, otherwise I don't finish. I speak from bitter experience: I have a vault of unfinished drafts that make me depressed whenever I open it to throw another onto the pile. For a story to end up there, it's usually because I tried to over-analyse it too early.

My suggestion is to have a rough idea of where your story is headed and come hell or high water, just keep writing it.

 

As someone who writes for a living and has to finish pieces as a matter of necessity, I can honestly say that rolling up your sleeves and redrafting in the moment doesn't hinder progress. If anything: it speeds things up.

Also, if I see a better way of structuring a sentence or paragraph, I bag it there and then. It's a bit silly to write a note about a sentence revision when I can spend the same time making the correction. I'm happy when I produce something clean and readable at the end of a writing session - even at first draft stage. A clear piece of writing
tends to make other flaws more visible because the mind isn't distracted by all the clunkiness and SPAG errors*.

I guess it's a hard-won discipline. Perhaps not suited to everyone. Perhaps not suited to the novelist.


*Right now I really want to redraft this post, but I haven't got time lol

 

Again, I support any method that gets the work done. I think quite a few people work the way you do—correcting as you go—and more power to their arms.

If ongoing revision means you don't ever get finished, however, I reckon a change of tactic might help.

By the way, I didn't mean to make a note of how to revise a sentence. Of course you just revise the sentence, don't you? But if you suddenly realise your character needs to change direction, and you're going to need to backtrack and rewrite quite a bit, and you're not sure yet what you're going to keep and what you're going to discard or change ...that's when the note comes in handy. Just make a note that here is where things change, and keep writing.

For the record, I do think writing a novel is a different sort of undertaking from most other kinds of writing. Each kind of writing presents its own challenges, and they're not all the same. My husband spent his working life as a journalist, a news sub, which meant his job was to rewrite things the reporters gave him so they'd fit into the paper. And then he had to devise a headline to fit the space. That's a heck of a lot different from writing a novel, even though he was writing all day long. Ditto what reporters wrote. Or columnists. Not the same thing at all.

 

I believe that one big problem with new writers is they imagine that editing is somehow a single thing that can be compartmentalized. The truth is, if you are not editing on a continuous bases, you're just playing around at being a writer. Editing is pretty much brain dead stuff. You can do it anywhere and at any time, and you ought to be.

The real problematic stuff is new material. I set aside one time every day (lunch, for me) to do new material. I might sit behind my laptop all day long, but I've conditioned by brain to open up at lunch time, and that's pretty odd, once you think on it. I'll peck around for a sentence or two all day long, and as soon as I sit down to lunch, bang, 1000 words. The question becomes, what to do with the rest of the day. Well of course, edit. You edit previous books. You edit what you wrote in previous chapters. You edit what you did the day prior. 90% of writing is editing, and that's even true of experienced writers who don't have nearly as much content editing to do.

My advice is to stop with this silliness of deciding when to edit. Just make that 24/7 and be done with it.

 

I'm (probably) one of those that can only write further if what I've written previously makes sense (characterisation & storyline). I tried for a long time to just write further without looking at the quality as others have said they do, but the result was that I got disgusted with my written words and blocked myself.

That I continually edit and rewrite results... in slow progress. It's not for the faint of heart, or for the writers who want to reward themselves with the words 'The End'—for me, a consistent piece of prior story is essential to writing a consistent story from then on. But then I'm a hobbywriter and I don't aspire to become the next great novelist with lots and lots of books to my name. Writing my story is reward in and of itself for me, and I'll get my story done and I'll be proud of it—somewhen

 

I agree that one of the marks of a good writer is to be able to "edit on the fly," as it were. But it's a skill that's acquired after a lot of experience with writing. Let me put it this way: to be able to juggle and walk at the same time is bound to get you lots of props, but you've got to learn to walk first, and juggle first, before you can combine the two.

 

This really doesn't match my experience.

 

I'm editing on a continuous basis. Playing around as a writer? Like you said. I'm not sure that's so true. I feel like editing is the real work. And it's far from braindead stuff. If you're not putting much into the editing process, you're probably not going to get a lot out of the editing process, which is too bad because it's such a big part of the whole writing process. I would say I edit a hell of a lot more than I used to. And that's because I know things better now. I spot problems or places where the story could be better now. So, experienced writer DO edit as much if not more than newer writers. And when you have something published (traditional published) you can expect an acceptance to be followed be a pretty extensive editing process.

I don't think it's silly at all to think about when to edit. Like I said, I spend a good amount of time editing my work, and I do think it's important. Some people push on through and get a draft down. Others edit as they go and spend time on the earlier parts of a story so they line up with the new direction you've decided to take with your story. These things can make a difference when it comes to finishing. I can't work with a disaster or something that's too messy and fails to make sense or say what I want. I know I can feel overwhelmed, and to avoid that I edit and revise and do it a bunch more times along the way. I am talking about content editing as well as grammar and such. For me, it makes the most sense to tackle problems when I notice them or they come to me. But this is not a shortcut. There is still more of all that to come when a story is finished.

I'm a little confused as to how you can see editing as 90 percent of writing, but also call it a brainless activity. I have found nothing brainless about the editing process. I also wouldn't say it's 90 percent of writing. Maybe I'm just not as experienced of a writer as I thought.

 

I'm writing. About 70,000 into my latest WIP. I write 500 words a day, spell check it and write more the next day if I can.

Editing? Later.

 

I likely could use more advice than I can give here, but (and because) so far on the project I call "my monster" I have produced very little. However, what I do have down is mostly readable. When I have something I wish to show anyone I make sure that the SPAG is the best I can do with the help of the free version of Grammarly before I print it and ask people to read it. That way anyone reading it will be looking at something that hopefully they will enjoy without having to read around the SPAG that is most noticeable. I also use the free version to take out the really bad SPAG stuff as I write when I can.

The above said and still hiding behind my being a very new writer, here is another tidbit that I offer for consideration. Back when I was on AOL (yes I started that long ago and still claim to be new) I attended an online talk where Ben Bova was a guest speaker, it was around that time (and I think he gave this advice) I was advised that anyone who is serious about writing needs to spend several hours writing even if all of it for that day goes in the trash. That may be something you may wish to attempt.

Contact me if you wish to know why I have yet to finish my monster, those reasons may not fit well into this thread.

With respect,
The dawg