Favorite approaches to editing?

[Djmac1031]

What awards are those???

Nobody knows. They can't find them.

 

[syn4321]

For Literotica, I do my own structural editing during the writing process. I frequently find scenes needing to be repositioned as the story develops so doing so as I write works best for me.

Copy editing is done through a combination of tools, such as Grammarly, and beta readers.

Proof editing is done by listening to the story as it is read back to me through either Word, or an online application.

"Beta readers" is a new idea for me. Tell me more or point me where to learn more, if you would?

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Yes, there's always a typo or two - an it's where it should have been its, a to where it should have been too, a missed comma before the closing quote on dialogue, etc.

But plot holes shouldn't get through. Continuity errors shouldn't get through. Characters with ambiguous motive shouldn't get through. If this is happening, the editing process is heavily lacking. And really that's just lack of patience. Writing is fun. Editing is boring. At least that's how many see it. Editing is also that big snarly junkyard dog between the author and his instant gratification feedback, comments and Red H. Can't we just skip that part? Again that's how many see it. Folks who write this way will never be more than hobby writers. To be at that next level one has to embrace editing as part of the craft, part of the fun, to understand that the satisfaction of a finished product that meets higher standards is a better feeling of its own.

I claim that all of my typos are purposeful "Easter Eggs" placed within a story to allow me to identify and prove someone stealing it.

No one has disproved me yet.

 

[nice90sguy]

cant be aresd to edit my stroies alot, tbh

 

[gunhilltrain]

Yes, there's always a typo or two - an it's where it should have been its, a to where it should have been too, a missed comma before the closing quote on dialogue, etc.

But plot holes shouldn't get through. Continuity errors shouldn't get through. Characters with ambiguous motive shouldn't get through. If this is happening, the editing process is heavily lacking. And really that's just lack of patience. Writing is fun. Editing is boring. At least that's how many see it. Editing is also that big snarly junkyard dog between the author and his instant gratification feedback, comments and Red H. Can't we just skip that part? Again that's how many see it. Folks who write this way will never be more than hobby writers. To be at that next level one has to embrace editing as part of the craft, part of the fun, to understand that the satisfaction of a finished product that meets higher standards is a better feeling of its own.

When I worked in professional publishing (the job was called production editor) I never worked on fiction. At one place that did scientific/medical books, they took there time and the work was I'd say 99% perfect.

Books for lawyers (mostly those loose-leaf binders you used to see in law offices) were a different matter. Many of the pages were placed every year (thus the loose-leaf format). The authors were partners and such at big law firms and wrote for prestige, not the piddling amount of money they got. They were always late with their manuscripts and proofs, and my companies would let them get away with it. They were were used to working eighty-hour weeks, or they would have their associates do it.

They were making six-figure salaries while we drones were making $20,000 (this was thirty to forty years ago). So guess who prevailed?

 

[orangecurious]

My general process is write a load of stuff. Read it again when I realise I haven't finished it. Hate it and leave it. Go back and re=read it. Try and finish it.

repeat this a few times.

then worry about submitting as people will hate it.

The submit it as I decide I don't care what they think anyway.

THEN spot the glaring mistakes.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Yes, there's always a typo or two - an it's where it should have been its, a to where it should have been too, a missed comma before the closing quote on dialogue, etc.

But plot holes shouldn't get through. Continuity errors shouldn't get through. Characters with ambiguous motive shouldn't get through. If this is happening, the editing process is heavily lacking. And really that's just lack of patience. Writing is fun. Editing is boring. At least that's how many see it. Editing is also that big snarly junkyard dog between the author and his instant gratification feedback, comments and Red H. Can't we just skip that part? Again that's how many see it. Folks who write this way will never be more than hobby writers. To be at that next level one has to embrace editing as part of the craft, part of the fun, to understand that the satisfaction of a finished product that meets higher standards is a better feeling of its own.

Part 2: I have read fiction where the author make some error in facts. Usually these are trivial, although I may notice them. I'm trying to think of any continuity errors or plot holes; maybe I'll remember one,

One that is fairly major; I'll try to be brief. Rick Moody's Garden State describes a real town in New Jersey called Haledon. Except, it's nothing like the real place (I used to live down the road). He seems to be describing someplace on the state's "Chemical Coast" further south like Rahway or Carteret. It's baffling why he used a real name when he obviously was thinking of someplace else.

 

[gunhilltrain]

I have a rolling edit process. Before each writing session I'll read over the previous five hundred or so words, correcting typos, misspellings, that kind of thing. Proofreading, to keep Pink Silk Glove's separation of duties. That also refreshes my mind as to the flow of the story, where it's going in terms of characters, story, the plot; but most importantly, to get what I call "the cadence and cascade" of the prose right: its beat, the rhythm, the musicality. I sometimes refer to it as the "song" of the prose. That's where I pay most attention, to the words and phrases: repetition where I want it, find another word where I don't, make it flow.

By the time a long story is written, the early parts will have been reread maybe forty or fifty times, and I know that the text is clean, and makes sense.

I'll frequently change the size, colour, and the font itself, during writing, to force my brain to see it differently. That flushes out most of the things I might otherwise miss, missing words, doubled up words. Word spellchecker catches the rest. I'll often put content through a word cloud, which is handy for finding unwanted repetition.

I used grammarly once or twice, just to see what everyone was on about, five years ago. It might be okay for bland business writing if you can't already do that, but I don't think it's useful for fiction at all. It wants to make every sentence read like a business report, if you slavishly follow its suggestions. I can see why it's so problematic as part of the current AI debate.

I did pick up that color/font change idea from ElectricBlue. It works quite well. Usually I use blue, dark red, or purple.

I'm okay with Grammarly (free version) although it requires judgment calls, quite a few in fact. I think somebody has suggested a free program that is better.

 

[MillieDynamite]

My favorite way to edit is to let the editor edit them, and I accept or reject them. It's not for everyone, but it works for me.