So, Michelle, I'm doing all these searches for to-be verbs and the word "was" and "that" and adverbs, and all that crap. What about this paragraph? I've written "was" in this paragraph EIGHT times. I've got to get rid of some!
I read through the paragraph. There was nothing wrong with it. I would have written it differently according to my own style, but it was beautiful writing. I didn't want to change a word. It got her point across just fine. I proceeded to glare at her over the camera. Sorry, Dear Friend. You know I love you. I think she'd crossed that line - you know, the one where you go kind of INSANE with editing your own work?
There's a point where we need to let go. I know I've whipped out the huge magnifying glass and started looking at my work like it's something to be completely dissected and ripped apart. Like you're ever going to get it back together into something recognizable...hah!
Danger Zone: When you start looking at the number of specific words in every single paragraph in your book. Too many "thats!" you cry, and start hitting the delete button like a crazy person. You start fixing things everywhere, and out of order. Then you realize that you've changed something back there that will affect something up here that will affect something over there. Crap.You've created a mess. So you do more editing, and before you know it three months have passed and you should have just rewritten the book from scratch.
Yes, I drew that picture with my limited drawing skills. Don't make fun of it.
I'm just saying there is a point where we step over the line. If you're serious about traditional publication, an editor will take your manuscript and make it all shiny and pretty. (If you want to publish your own work, hire an editor if you can.) If there's an ugly WAS glaring somewhere, they'll nix it. Some things are just too small to spend three months stressing over.
Use your common sense and be aware that if you're entering Danger Zone territory, maybe you should call up a good friend and have them talk you down from that delete-frenzy ledge. You know, when you start to go cross-eyed and think every sentence you write is utter crap? Yeah, I know you've been there. I have, too.
I blame it on TMFR... Too Many Fucking Rules... Rules that are imposed by people in The Know, though those in The Know often disagree with each other b/c, you know, this whole writing thing is kind of a subjective thing....
ReplyDeleteTMFR dominates my editing at times... sometimes helpful, sometimes destructive.
I'm dying from laughter, this was awesome. And that totally looks like me on my Mac! Haha! Love it. Love it love it love it. Very good point my friend! And a point well taken!
ReplyDeleteYeah, I've been there. I have to say that I'm one of those total weirdos who LOVE editing. I do it for friends (for free) and part-time for clients (for money). I do it for myself (for damned hard work!). I enjoy it. But I agree -if ever I get to the stage of randomly cutting every second "that" or (my personal pet hate) "had been", then I turn off the computer and go walk my dogs. They soon make me see sense!
ReplyDeleteI knew THAT..
ReplyDeletehaha..no, I really do over edit sometimes. Of course, I found the word "little" (with Lois' help) waaayyy to many times in my last ms. The little girl slid her little hand into the little pocket...
okay, not that bad..but close ;)
I don't think the problem is with "too many rules" so much as it's with people attempting to obey what they think of as authority figures. A lot of people write about writing without actually knowing much about writing. This group includes agents (not all) and aspiring novelists (not all) who want to share what they think they've learned. So you get people parroting the "don't use adverbs" advice all over the internet and then you start to think "gosh, look at the adverbs in my MS" and then you panic. (Adverbs, by the way, are perfectly nice words. The problem is that people will modify weak verbs with adverbs when they should be using stronger verbs.)
ReplyDeleteSo here's the thing: the best way to learn about good writing is not by reading tips on websites, but by reading well written books. I don't scour my prose for "was" or passive voice or adverbs; I read it over for flow and clarity.
Mighty Reader always thinks I've lost it when I revise/edit, because my idea of a "light edit" involves what she considers substantial changes. But I never run down a list of grammatical rules and hunt for Evil Parts Of Speech. That's just nuts. Don't do it.
Find a real, excellent writer as your model for usage. Throw out your Strunk & White while you're at it. There, I've said the sacreligious words. But remember that S&W is a style guide, not a primer on grammar. If you don't want to write in the style of Strunk, use the book for tinder. Hey, I'm rambling and I have deadlines at the office, so I'm off now.
*Throw out Strunk and White* ... first I need to figure out where I misplaced it... However, I think the adage about omitting needless words is a critical one (figure out what's needless... yeah, that's the hard part)... and by omitting needless words, I don't think of 'that' or adverbs so much as unnecessary description/dialog/etc...
ReplyDeleteScott, so on board with editing for flow. Nothing harder for me than segue flow (A good name for a band, i think).
I had a moment like that. Was going through a crit from a friend and about 30 pages in I closed without saving. I was going too fast, not taking enough time to consider the suggestion and felt my voice was dying fast. Glad I caught myself!
ReplyDeleteBane: The problem is that "needless" is subjective. The needs are determined by the aims of the prose and the story, not by Mr Strunk and Mr White. Every word of Proust is just as important as every word of Hemingway.
ReplyDeleteAh yes, the number of times I've heard 'there should only be one 'was' per page' on writing help sites... I kinda get where she's coming from...
ReplyDeleteScott, agreed. My point was that, as a writer, being close to your work, it's sometimes hard to know if you've overmilked a scene.
ReplyDeleteBane: Agreed. I think the only cure is to walk away from the work for long enough to forget the details of the prose. Then you can look at it again and say, "WFT was I thinking?" but without being in that white-hot-and-blind madness state.
ReplyDeleteI've ruined a lot of work by editing it when I wasn't in the right state of mind. Thinking back on those times, the revising always felt mechanical, like part of my brain was turned off when I was making those bad changes. I think I have a lighter touch when I revise now. I'm also more willing to throw stories away if I think they've hit a dead end.
ReplyDeleteDavin: That's IT, exactly: editing as a mechanical exercise to destroy prose. We should edit with the same creativity with which we write. We should think of "editing" as writing, in fact. Because it is. It's not like mowing the lawn or doing the dishes. It's an artistic endeavor.
ReplyDeleteI learned a lot from getting MONARCH edited by a professional editor. I think I learned more from that experience than any other single thing I've ever done with my writing. It made me realize what a difference it makes to have someone who does that for a living work on your stuff.
ReplyDeleteScott, I love what you say about the mowing lawn and dishes thing. I think a lot of times we think of our "writing job" as something that just has to be done. We can't think of it that way. It IS an artistic endeavor. It's something we have to treat differently than a job (even though it can be a job). That's why it can be so tricky and why so many writers seem to gravitate to the RULES so quickly - they seem like an easy trick to get things where you want them. "Seem" is the key word there.
Patricia, I think you hit something there. That kind of "editing" is probably one of the quickest ways to kill "voice" - if there is such a thing.
ReplyDeleteI needed this.
ReplyDeleteI'm in that "reading everything about writing" phase where every one is throwing rules at you and sometimes I feel like my sentence post edit is going to end up looking like:
"Bacon eat much good."
Which just doesn't seem right.
And thanks for this comment:
"Adverbs, by the way, are perfectly nice words. The problem is that people will modify weak verbs with adverbs when they should be using stronger verbs."
*hugs my occasional adverbs and welcomes them back*
I wouldn't throw out Stunk & White, anymore than a jazz musician would abandon music theory. The key is to voluntarily disregard rules, but to do so you must first understand the rules.
ReplyDeleteWhile "The Elements of Style" (i.e. Strunk & White) is a rule book, the final chapter acknowledges that rules are made to be broken:
In this final chapter we approach style in its broader meaning: style in the sense of what is distinguished and distinguishing...There is no satisfactory explanation of style, no infallible guide to good writing, no assurance that a person who thinks clearly will be able to write clearly...no inflexible rule by which writers may shape their course. Writers will often find themselves steering by stars that are disturbingly in motion.
For me, there comes a point in my editing where things are no longer better, they are just different. That's when it's time to stop.
Strunk & White is to music theory what the Lexicon of Musical Invective is to grammar. And music theory, of course, is just a bunch of changing opinions. Is "The Elements of Style" more or less valid today than "Gradus ad Parnassum," and to whom and why?
ReplyDeleteIt's certainly worth considering when Strunk and White first appeared, namely, at the beginning of the 20th Century, when the style was switching from grandiloquent and long, to short and punchy, like advertising. Sentence length is a fashion, just like word length.
ReplyDeleteExcuse me, I meant to say, "Sentence length is a fashion, just like SKIRT length." :D
ReplyDeleteI think that image really beautifully conveys what you were trying to put across! And yeah, editing can be addictive. To some of us, it's less stress that adding words to blank pages.
ReplyDeleteI've definitely been in the editing danger zone. When I changed something and then later changed it back to the original, I knew it was time to stop. Someone mentioned editing as an addiction, and I think there is some truth to that.
ReplyDeleteA friend of mine was about to rewrite her book and make it into two books instead beacuse of some comments by her daughter and by a publisher who said that no-one will want it because it covers the subject of cults, and cults aren't popular at the moment.
ReplyDeleteI persuaded her that the book is fine and that all she needs to do is re-market it. To do this, we went into Waterstones bookshop and looked at the crime section, looked for books with some similarities. She wrote those down and re-drafted her cover letter.
Much easier and far less soul destroying. Time will tell if ti works.
Martin, cult books are HUGE right now. Tell your friend to hang on.
ReplyDeleteI totally do searches for be verbs, that, in a moment, she felt, all those. I don't spend three months on it. It's usually just a find a replace, quick thing.
ReplyDeleteOh dear... oh dear me... I'm one of those people, and I never even really knew it, until I read this post. You are so right, Michelle.
ReplyDeleteSometimes enough, really is enough. I search for 'was' throughout my entire manuscripts, and I go about scrapping them and rewording... same with adverbs. Because the sneaky wee fellas always seem to find their way into my prose. Stephen King once compared them to daisies or dandelions on your lawn. One may look pretty, but if you don't weed it, before you know it - you'll have millions of them.
And I know that there is a place for them. I just need to figure out where - because I like them.
Maybe it is the TMFR theory as Bane of Anubis pointed out.