posted
Am I the only one who has this problem? Hopefully some of you can help. When I write a story (or novel) the words pour from me in a flood and I can write for hours with great results. Sometimes. Anyway, the point is, the first draft is usually pretty easy for me.
The problem comes in with revision. Every single story that I have posted in F&F, when I posted my revision, everyone liked the first version better. Revision for me is like pulling teeth; I never have the "flow" that happens with first drafts.
When I was in high school, I won a half dozen writing contests, several on the state level. Every time I won, without exception, I submitted basically a first draft, with perhaps a couple minor grammatical changes (I'm not saying the first draft was as good as it could have been, but I was lazy and it was good enough at the time).
So now that I'm much more serious about writing, I don't want to settle for the first draft, but I don't know how to revise without killing my work. My revisions seem to deaden the spirit somehow, or muffle the "voice" I use.
posted
That's a good idea, actually. Here are a few others:
First, don't get a piece back to the same group for feedback.
Let me repeat that:
DON'T GIVE A PIECE BACK TO THE SAME GROUP FOR FEEDBACK!!!
Why not? Well, you didn't take *my* suggestion so this can't possibly be good enough or why did you rewrite it that way. Worst of all, there's no way we can comment on clarity in a second draft because eventually we probably figured it out from the first darft or maybe a combination fo the two. Each draft has to stand on its own.
Simply put, sending a piece back to the same group for feedback is a Bad idea (with a capital 'B'). Card mentioned this at boot camp, and with some small exceptions I have always taken him seroiusly. Don't get me wrong, I've been in a pinch before where all Ih ave is people who've read the idea before or maybe the comments required such a huge rewrite that I figured what the heck, they'll hardly recognize it anyway, but I really shouldn't do it even then.
Second: Don't take everyone's advice. Sometimes you can't, because it's contradictory, and you have to pick one. (In that case, you should always go with mine...j/k ) But even if the advice is not contradictory don't take it all. Take advice that:
1. Speaks do you and your plan for this story. 2. Is mentioned by many people (and you don't have a very good reason for ignoring a lot of people. Sometimes you decide that the problem is actually something other than what they thought it was and change that instead.)
But for goodness sakes, don't listen to everyone. Especially, don't listen to people who are trying to rewrite it for you or "tweak the language." There are a hundred right ways to write anything. Your original way is probably the truest to your style. Now, this is still subject to the same rules as above. If something is incredibly awkward and you agree when someone poitns it out or if something is written incorrectly (grammar error) or if many people point some language thing out, then still go wtih it.
There will be some advice you ignore. In fact, I will go so far as to say that if there isn't (aside from contradictory things) then you haven't learned how to take criticism yet.
3. When you do a rewrite, know what you did before, why you need a change, what that change might be, and why. But don't look at the old version
posted
My philosophy on editting, revising and re-writing is two-fold:
1. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I might try tweaking things a little bit, but if I like the feel of something, I won't change it. The thing with critiquers is that sometimes they can see where things might need fixing. Sometimes you need to add a little something, other times you may need to cut, and then there are times when you don't need to do anything -- so don't.
2. Do no harm.
This is usually applied to editing other people's work, but the application can be reversed. If a suggestion goes against what you're sure is right for your story, then don't do it. If making a change harms the flow or feel of your story, don't do it. If leaving something in harms the story, take it out.
Writing can always be improved and as Christine said, "There are a hundred right ways to write anything." So do what you need to polish it up, but don't feel like you HAVE to make significant changes.
[This message has been edited by Robyn_Hood (edited March 10, 2005).]
posted
Autumn - you are not alone in this particular frustration. I go through it as well, which is why I hated to tell you I liked the first version better because I know how frustrating that is!
Christine's advise makes a lot of sense to me. Mike's seems overwhelming but it might actually be good. I think our first drafts are better because we are not paying as close attention to form and structure. We are just intent on getting the vision in our head onto the page. By rewriting it from scratch, as he suggested, but keeping in mind the comments that were made, we might be able to combine the natural flow of a first draft with the better form of a rewrite.
posted
IMHO revising is a learned art. I often revise upwards of a dozen times. That's normal for me and it's what I'm comfortable with. I think better when I see the words on paper, so the first draft is merely an opportunity to fill some sheets. Revising over and over gives me a chance to make the story richer by bringing in more thoughts and ideas that may have been missing in the first draft.
Other writers hardly revise at all. Their first draft work is of a quality that they feel needs little revision. I wish I were one of them.
It's simply a matter of comfort zone. Practice at it awhile and it will get easier, just like writing.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
) But even if the advice is not contradictory don't take it all. Take advice that:
