How to use this Page

Add a Comment

Add a Comment

Add a Comment

How can you tell if a piece of writing is strong? Whether you’re editing for a publishing company, working as a freelancer, or self-editing, correctly assessing the quality of the work is imperative. In this excerpt from The Editor’s Companion, Steve Dunham discusses four marks of good writing and how you can recognize them in every piece you review.

---

1. Good Content

Communication, even in writing, requires two people. Every time a writer begins putting words together for publication, one fact should always be foremost: The writing is (at least partly) for the benefit of someone else. Even if a writer begins without a specific audience clearly in mind, the goal of communication remains. The writing must achieve a link between author and reader.

The editor, too, must always remember the reader. Both writer and reader may benefit from written communication, but editing is done primarily to benefit the reader, to smooth the process of communication.

The content of any piece of writing ultimately must be of personal interest to the reader. From news headlines to novels, from apartment leases to the Bible, every piece of writing attracts readers by providing something that concerns individual people.

An editor faces the task of taking a piece of writing and heightening its relevance to those individuals who constitute the publisher’s readers or market.

2. Focus

Each sentence, says editor Margaret Palm, should convey one idea. So should each paragraph and each chapter, with the ideas becoming more general as the writer progresses up the scale. This sort of cohesion does not limit the number of ideas a writer is able to communicate; rather, it organizes them. Focusing on one idea at a time makes for clear, direct communication. It does not leave the reader guessing where the writing is headed. It does not distract the reader with digression. Instead it takes a general idea as the subject of a chapter, develops an aspect of that idea in each paragraph, and provides details in every sentence. Focused writing, like a focused photograph, presents information clearly.

The classic style of newswriting, with the “most important” facts at the top, followed by less and less important facts in descending order is called the inverted pyramid. Inverted pyramid leads begin with who, what, when, where, why, and how, all in a few sentences.

Those five Ws of journalism also provide a guide for both writers and editors of nonfiction. In a news story, the writer must tell the reader who, what, when, where, and why—preferably in the first paragraph. Although not all nonfiction needs to be as compact as news writing, the editor must be sure that the basic facts are communicated.

Even in fiction, the five Ws need to be addressed somewhere in the story, although depending on the genre—mystery, for example—key parts of the story may be withheld until the end.

3. Precise Language¹

The writer’s biggest job is that of combining words—and often numbers and graphics—to share ideas. Organizing the material and choosing precisely the right words require more effort than just writing down what is in the writer’s head. The knowledgeable writer possesses information or ideas that the reader does not. To make that information accessible, the writer must use words that the reader understands (or explain any that the reader does not). The writer must choose which information to include and must decide what is superfluous or would burden the reader. Appendices, footnotes, and bibliographies are all communication tools. So are abbreviations. They help the reader understand what the writer has to say.

The editor’s job is to help the writer communicate with the reader, and just about all of us—including editors—need some help with our writing. Sometimes we have a little trouble saying what we mean. Editors do make sure the commas are in the right place. (It does make a difference: My favorite comma error was in an ad in the church bulletin for a supper hosted by the youth group; it read, “Don’t cook Mom!”) Editors also do a lot more, ensuring good content, focus, precise language, and good grammar.

Editors are on guard for much more than missing commas, however. Writers might, for example, get a little repetitive: “The analysis phase of the project consisted of analysis,” stated one report I read. A job ad required “program related experience in related areas”—one of those “necessary conditions that must be met.”

“Better say nothing at all. Language is worth a thousand pounds a word!” as Lewis Carroll wrote in Through the Looking-Glass.

The reader’s time is worth something, too. Let’s not waste it by stating the obvious. If our work is read voluntarily, we will lose readers if we waste their time. Often, though, we may be editing a piece of writing that people are obligated to read, and we owe it to them to communicate simply and clearly.

In The Island of Doctor Moreau by H.G. Wells, the Monkey-man— a monkey that Doctor Moreau had been trying to turn into a human—“was for ever jabbering … the most arrant nonsense” and “had a fantastic trick of coining new words. He had an idea … that to gabble about names that meant nothing was the proper use of speech. He called it ‘Big Thinks’ … He thought nothing of what was plain and comprehensible.”

Writers can commit Big Thinks by using imprecise language or misusing words entirely. Some writers may impress themselves by using big words they don’t understand. Utilize may sound more impressive than use (but has a specific meaning of its own: to find a use for). Comprise is not the same as compose (it means “be made up of,” as in “New York City comprises five boroughs”); a nation-state isn’t merely a sovereign country (it’s the country of a single nationality); coalesce isn’t transitive (things coalesce, people don’t coalesce things). Emulate means “do at least as well as,” but imitate, the word that is more likely appropriate, doesn’t sound nearly as impressive. Respective is often used where it is not needed, as in “The adjutant generals report to their respective governors”—well, of course they report to their own governors. Writing to impress oneself or others is what editor Dave Fessenden called “the curse of Babel.” He pointed out that people built the Tower of Babel to make a name for themselves and ended up with their language confounded—a result still obtained by vain and pompous writers, he said.

Editors must be alert to misused words. Words Into Type has an excellent twenty-three-page list of “Words Likely to Be Misused or Confused”; The Elements of Style has a similar list, and Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary has usage notes for many entries.

In his book Doublespeak,² William Lutz described another way of misusing big words: “gobbledygook or bureaucratese … a matter of piling on words, of overwhelming the audience” or “inflated language that is designed to make the ordinary seem extraordinary.” That language is meant to impress, and specifically to deceive, the reader.

Aside from writers who deceive themselves, readers are usually the victims of misused words. As William Safire wrote in his book In Love with Norma Loquendi,³ “Meanings can be assigned to words to suit the speaker, corrupting communication and derailing intelligent discourse.”

For example, one job description stated, “Demonstrates technical achievement at the highest Government and corporate levels.” In plain English, what does that mean? It sounds as if the job applicant must have been president, chief justice, or speaker of the house. Such overblown prose corrupts communication and derails intelligent discourse, to borrow Safire’s wording.

When writing and editing, let our first concern be the reader. Let’s not try to impress anyone, least of all ourselves. Instead of engaging in Big Thinks, let’s pursue the goal of “plain and comprehensible” communication.

4. Good Grammar⁴

“I don’t care about grammar,” a writer told me when he brought his article in for editing.

In fact it seemed that the writer, like many others, didn’t care about a lot of things.

“This merger does not seems to posse any intimate security risks to the United States” was one statement in the article. I called out the posse of language deputies; we changed posse to pose and fixed dozens more errors, grammar and otherwise. We had to query the author to find out what intimate was supposed to be (he’d meant to use immediate).

Unfortunately this writer was not alone. Not in making mistakes—we all make those—but in not caring. George Orwell cited two common faults in English writing: “staleness of imagery” and “lack of precision. The writer either has a meaning and cannot express it, or he inadvertently says something else, or he is almost indifferent as to whether his words mean anything or not.”⁵

If a writer doesn’t care about grammar, the writer at least should care about the reader. If you have something worth saying, then care about communicating it.

The editor, who is assisting communication between writer and reader, must scrutinize every piece of writing that is intended for publication and, to the greatest extent possible, make the text conform to the marks of good writing.

Author Stephen Coonts, in a July 2001 interview with Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute,⁶ discussed the editing of his books (the Naval Institute Press published his first novel, Flight of the Intruder).

Proceedings: How were you treated, editorially, at the Naval Institute Press, compared to your subsequent publishers?

Coonts: The Naval Institute is unique, because it probably publishes more first-time writers—not so much first-time novelists, but first-time writers—than any other publishing house I know. So for me it was a great place to learn how to write by working with the editors and to learn how to get a manuscript up to what is called “commercial quality.”

Subsequently, I went to Doubleday, where they have a line editor who looks at the manuscript and puts in some commas and takes some out. How you wrote it is the way it’s going to be in the book. It’s tough for most beginning writers to get their prose ready to be published. It was a really great educational experience at the Naval Institute. I worked with a great editor, and I learned a lot.

Proceedings: So you’d say you were edited more at the Naval Institute Press?

Coonts: Yes. They edited the living hell out of the book. I think they overedited some of the passages. In some cases they improved it; in some cases they made it worse. Looking back, I don’t think they had much faith that I knew what the story I was telling was all about. On the other hand, the folks I worked with knew their English, and what a sentence was, and how the prose had to come together. On balance, it was a great learning experience for me.

As Coonts pointed out, editors make mistakes, too. Sometimes we attempt to improve clarity and end up muddying the water instead. Worse, we sometimes accidentally change the correct meaning to something incorrect. “One of my greatest dreads as a copy editor is that I will change something to make it wrong,” wrote copy editor Laura Moyer in her Red Pen blog.⁷ “Changing things on the proof is risky, as it raises the possibility of introducing an error while attempting to correct an existing one,” she wrote in another blog entry.⁸ Editing for focus, precision, and grammar are essential and less hazardous than editing for content, which requires some knowledge of the subject matter.

Furthermore, overconfidence can lead to wrongly second-guessing an author’s meaning. An editing error in Under Two Flags: The American Navy in the Civil War by William M. Fowler, Jr.,⁹ led to a cure that was worse than whatever the supposed illness was: “Galena was far smaller than New Ironsides, 738 tons versus 3,486; her topsail schooner rig and exaggerated tumble made her home immediately recognizable.” When I read that, I suspected that it should have read, “… her exaggerated tumblehome made her immediately recognizable”—tumblehome being the inward curving of a ship’s sides as they rise (some ships, anyway). Galena indeed was immediately recognizable because of her exaggerated tumblehome (see the photo). Evidently the nautical term tumblehome was unknown to the editor, who rearranged the sentence into immediately recognizable words (the author confirmed that this was an editing error but added, “Alas, I read proofs”).

An extreme example of second-guessing the meaning was a reference to a story in the Atlanta Constitution headlined “Mock Bioterror Attack Spooks Some in Denver.” Someone citing it decided it was a mistake and, in a footnote, changed it to read, “Mock Bioterror Attack Some Spooks in Denver.”

Both the word tumblehome and the Atlanta Constitution headline were verifiable with a little research. Second-guessing the meaning (rather than looking it up to verify it) is one hazard for editors.

Arthur Plotnik, author of The Elements of Editing, noted another: Editors “must stop short of a self-styled purism and allow for some variety of expression.”¹⁰ All editing requires care to ensure that the writing communicates better than it did in its original form.

Plotnik posed ten questions for editors to critically examine their own work:¹¹ Has the editor

1. “weighed every phrase and sentence … to determine whether the author’s meaning” was preserved?
2. “measured every revision … against the advantages of the author’s original”?
3. “pondered the effectiveness of every phrase”?
4. “studied every possible area of numerical, factual, or judgmental error”?
5. searched “for typos and transpositions, especially in” parts that were “retyped or reorganized,” and “edited and proofread” the portions altered by the editor?
6. “groveled in the details of the footnotes, tables, and appendices”?
7. “cast a legal eye upon every quoted phrase, defamatory comment, trade name, allegation, and attribution”?
8. “stepped back to consider the impact of the whole as well as the parts”?
9. “provided all the editorial embellishments to the text—title, subtitle, subhead, author notes, sidebars …”?
10. “cleared every significant revision and addition with the author?”—if that “is the policy of the publication.”

As Plotnik’s list indicates, editors must be certain that they are actually improving the author’s writing. Overconfidence comes all too easily, and we need to handle the author’s creation with care.

---

This article was excerpted from The Editor’s Companion by Steve Dunham. Filled with advice and techniques for honing your editing skills, this book provides the tools you need to pursue high quality in editing, writing and publishing—every piece, every time.

---

 

Footnotes

1. Portions of this section appeared in Precision for Writers and Editors, September 1999; “Writing for Everybody,” Precision for Writers and Editors, spring 2001; “Better Writing: Stating the Obvious,” Transmissions, June–July 2001; and “Big Thinks” and “Word Abuse,” Precision for Writers and Editors, Autumn 2001; all copyright Analytic Services Inc. and are used with permission.
2. William Lutz, Doublespeak (New York: Harper & Row, 1989).
3. William Safire, In Love with Norma Loquendi (New York: Random House, 1994).
4. Portions of this section appeared in Precision for Writers and Editors, September 1999, copyright Analytic Services Inc., and are used with permission.
5. George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language.”
6. Fred L. Schultz, “Interview: Stephen Coonts,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, vol. 127, no. 7, July 2001, p. 68.
7. Laura Moyer, “Rock. Copy Editor. Hard Place,” Red Pen blog, Fredericksburg, Va., Free Lance–Star, June 7, 2011.
8. Laura Moyer, “Lie/Lay. I Had to Tackle This Sometime,” Red Pen blog, Fredericksburg, Va., Free Lance–Star, Aug. 2, 2011.
9. William M. Fowler, Jr., Under Two Flags: The American Navy in the Civil War (New York: W. W. Norton, 1990).
10. Arthur Plotnik, The Elements of Editing, p. 3.
11. Arthur Plotnik, The Elements of Editing, pp. 35–36.

Add a Comment

Add a Comment

Add a Comment

It’s good to write badly. Baldly, in my case. Back in the noisy days of  typewriters I was indebted to a strip of white tape that I placed on the paper to strike out mistakes. This was replaced in time … Continue reading →

Add a Comment

Sola-RWA Writers group is having a full day class on Self-Editing and our instructor is the fabulous instructor, Liz Pelletier, Sr. Editor of Entangled Publishing. (See info below or go to www.solawrites.com)


~ Have you completed a rough draft of your book but have no idea how to tackle your edits?
Have your submission efforts netted a full request from an editor or agent only to end in
rejection after they’ve reviewed your manuscript? Do you want to learn how to edit like a
professional editor? Then you are a prime candidate for this Self-Editing Workshop by Entangled Publishing Co-Owner and Editor Liz Pelletier. ~

• When: Saturday, June 22, 2013
• Where: Andrea’s Restaurant, 3100 19th Street, Metairie, LA 70002 (map)
• Time: 8:30am – 4:00pm with pitches from 4:00pm-5:00pm
• Cost: SOLA Members $85/ Non-members $90 (Early registration ends June 1st.)
  • Late registration (June 2-10) SOLA Members $95/ Non-members $100
  • Registration includes light breakfast and lunch.
  • Space for the workshop and pitches is limited. Sign up early to ensure your spot.

To sign up go to:  www.solawriters.com and click on the Events page.

Hope to see you there!

Dawn Chartier

Add a Comment

Don Russell is a nationally known software developer and self-confessed “geek.” During a conversation with a friend regarding the cost of editing Don’s cerebral light bulb lit up and it’s been flashing ever since.

Don impressed us with his website, AutomatedEditing.com, which we reviewed in May of 2011. After many improvements, Don launched version 4.0 of the site and it is absolutely a joy to use. We really began to wonder, though, “Just what drives this man to constantly tinker with this editing website?” So, of course, we decided to ask!

WOW: Hello Don, welcome back to The Muffin! Automated Editing is constantly evolving—this must be time consuming. What drives you to constantly improve the website?

Don: Because it will never be “finished.” The problem with the English language is, well, the English language. It is amazingly complex, and totally inconsistent. It keeps evolving, and changing. So trying to write algorithms that can look at something so “squishy,” and still give valuable, valid advice is worse than herding cats. It never ends. Robyn, you once reminded me that Oscar Wilde spent a day inserting and deleting the same comma. Only a writer or an editor (or a senile algorithm creator) could see the wry, painful humor in that event.

Let me use the simple example of a period. We all know periods end sentences. Ah, I wish it were that simple. What if they are the end of an abbreviation, or part of a number, currency, or part of an ellipse? What if there is a following parenthesis or quotation? Are they part of an internet address? One of the most difficult things for our software is something that probably sounds easy—determining where a sentence was meant to end.

And what about certain words? “Friend” is a noun, right? Wrong! It can be a verb today (I just friended you on . . .”) or even, in very tortured English, an adjective (My friended neighbor is the one who . . .” And it could also be a typo/misspelling of “fiend,” or a common salutation. Ugh.

The bottom line is that every time I run a new test document through the software, I find something new—an exception I never thought of, or an outright error. Unlike a pro editor, around 20% of the time our software gets it totally wrong. That will never change, even as we improve and add to the software, because English is so squishy. (Just visit the forums at the CMS to see brilliant editors and writers arguing over how something should be done!) The only solution is to strap on the keyboard, brew a large pot of coffee, and get back to work.

WOW: How has usage of the software compared to what you expected when you started the project two years ago?

Don: I was not even close on predicting why members most enjoyed the site. When I started this project, my goal was to help fellow starting authors and I thought the main (perhaps only) use would be by authors who could not yet afford to invest in a great pro editor, and needed a low-cost way to get to the point where investing thousands in pro editing would be a great decision. They could catch most of their major errors and style issues, and get their writing to the next level to prepare for contests, first submissions, etc. Soon they would get to the point where a pro editor would be a logical next investment in their writing.

Yet today, with 20-20 hindsight, I discovered that there was another usage that has proven to be much more important to many users. The number one use is by authors who want a 24/7, easy-going English tutor to help rapidly improve their writing and style. The best example I can give is an author who told me “People keep telling me I have a run-on sentence problem. How can I change that?” Well, all she needed was a few passes with the software where all her run-on sentences were flagged, along with suggestions for improvement, before she made huge improvements in that part of her writing.

That’s the benefit of the instant feedback from the software. It takes only a few times being flagged for a dialog error before you tend to stop making that particular dialog error in new writing. Misuse “which” and “that”—and the software points it out for you, so you easily learn the proper usage. Your writing gets better and better!

So my original goal turned out to be the number two reason. Oh, and the number three reason never dawned on me back when I started—business people checking reports and emails before sending out a potentially “embarrassing” mistake!

WOW: I confess; I’ve used the software to improve my writing as well! About your software, how do algorithms help us edit our writing?

Don: In a word—instant feedback! (Or maybe that’s two words!)

I cannot overstate how exciting it is when I get emails from members who find that their grammar, and therefore their writing, improves week after week as they use the software. People forget that the reason we want good grammar and punctuation is not to please the editors and publishers—but to make sure the reader gets our message! Good editing makes your intent clear to the reader. I think those who have the creativity to write are also, almost by definition, good learners. The software instantly points out problem areas, explains why, and offers suggestions. Their writing gets clearer and more powerful as the grammar becomes easier.

One other insightful comment I received was a bit of a surprise, but made a great deal of sense the more I thought about it. “The computer doesn’t judge or threaten. It just offers ideas late at night when I am looking at what I wrote. I can deal with that. It’s a lot easier than having my boyfriend point out every mistake he thinks I made.”

I get encouragement every week from members of our site who find that the instant feedback on their writing continually improves them, and make them better writers. The stories start to jump out from the words. After all, it only takes a few times when the software points clauses that are confusing before they stop making that mistake!

WOW: This has been quite a journey for you. What have you learned about yourself or others along the way?

Don: I am sad to say that one thing I have learned was a real surprise to me, and was very discouraging. In short, I find that more and more writers see very little value in proper grammar and punctuation, and their writing suffers as a result. I see this every day in e-books, blogs, and even major websites. They seem to believe that “. . . people should only look at the idea, not the grammar.”

Sadly, it is not as simple as that.

I think they miss the point about why editing is important. It is not just to live up to some silly rules set by ancient librarians somewhere! It is that the sole purpose of editing is to make sure your message and story are clear to the reader. Bad grammar or punctuation (unless you are Ferlinghetti!) destroys even great writing when it loses the reader.

The best examples of this are run-on sentences and passive voice. Neither of these is automatically “bad grammar.” Often they are excellent and powerful ways to convey and image or story. But more often than not, run-on sentences are so messy that they lose the reader completely. And passive voice often runs the danger of making the object of the sentence unclear. Beyond these two examples, I would guess that a large portion of those who purchase books (I personally would guess more than two-thirds) find bad grammar to be so distracting that it would significantly detract from their enjoyment of the work.

And all that goes double for contest judges and publishing acquisition evaluators!

The good news is that the best writers (in terms of creativity and stories) consistently have better grammar and punctuation. There seems to be a relationship between creative writing, and good grammar. The best writers create an idea, and then precisely use the English language to get it across. That is what hooks the reader. You somehow stop looking at the words, and start to enter the author’s vision. Neat!

WOW: You obviously love language as much as you love those algorithms! Thank you for visiting with us today, Don. We appreciate all the time you put in to help us polish our work. I'm sure writers will want to check out the new and improved AutomatedEditing.com.

Interview by Robyn Chausse

Display Comments Add a Comment

Credit: Sidewalk Flying | Flickr

In my last post, I asked for questions about self-editing. Angela asked a great question about how to start self-editing on a novel she hasn't touched since 2005. What I would advise for tackling an edit after such a distance is:

• More time. Okay, so not eight more years. But before reaching into the drawer to pull out the manuscript, I would take some time to think about what the novel is about. Not what you thought the novel was about so many years ago, but what you think the novel is about. As if you were recalling The Great Gatsby. Describe the main character and his or her motivations. What is the conflict in the novel? Sketch out a basic idea of the plot. Although you may not have touched your novel since 2005, I'm positive your brain has worked on it some, maybe even working through some of the plot issues. Capture that before you start editing.
• Read it! I'd like to offer the advice to keep your pen down the first time you read through, but I find that difficult to do. To keep you from marking up or rewriting during the first go-round, promise yourself to only use a highlighter to indicate where you think there may be problems (punctuation or other difficulties). With a highlighter, you won't be able to change and rewrite like you might with a red pen. It will also allow you some fluid reading time. If you need to note something, do so on a notepad during your first reading. (This is something possible electronically, as well.)
• Study your notes. Before you take up the red pen, study the notes you've made to determine if the plot or characters' motivations need adjusting. Note if there are any big picture changes you can make.
• Start editing! Keeping your notepad by your side, now you can start editing. Tackle one chapter or section at a time. Don't try to tackle the whole manuscript in one sitting as the frustration may force you to throw it back in the draw. During the edit, refer often to your notes and make more notes to keep the consistency throughout. Pay particular attention to the highlighted areas.

 As Angela mentioned, her voice will have certainly changed. Personally, the change is something that I would try to embrace. Yes, your grammar and punctuation may have shifted in the time since you last touched this novel--just make the changes without judging your earlier self. As much as possible, enjoy the editing process as you did writing the novel.

You're in a different place now. Take your novel there with you.

Do you have a self-editing question you would like answered? Just ask in the "Comments" section and I'll do my best to answer it in my next post.

Elizabeth King Humphrey is a North Carolina-based writer and editor. She earned her master's in creative writing from UNC Wilmington and her editing certificate from the University of Chicago, Graham School.

Display Comments Add a Comment

Some of my editing tools. Photo | Elizabeth King Humphrey

Even though you're a strong writer, everyone suggests hiring an editor. But why can't you edit the book yourself? I have a friend who expressed that very question. Trust me, I'm not against self-editing. But my friend was amazed after I described all that was involved in the editing I do, for an example, for client's memoir. One element she didn't think I would have been concerned with was fact-checking. But that's just one of the many things that should be considered in the editing phase.

What are some of the things you might need to keep in mind when you are self-editing a piece of writing?

1. Give yourself distance. Finished the draft Tuesday morning and editing starts Tuesday afternoon? Not quite. Allow yourself some time between finishing a draft and starting the edit. Your fresh eyes will more readily catch any possible errors.
2. Ask questions before you start. Are there areas that you noticed in your draft that think might need some extra help? A place where you want to make sure less is more? Make note of those places and try to answer those questions as you edit, taking particular care for the plot points you feel need additional focus.
3.  Stay close to your dictionary. You may have seen the word accomodate a million times and think you know how to spell it. But watch out! There are dozens of words that we think we've spelled right, but we may have just accommodated ourselves to the wrong spelling.
4. Style guides are your friend. If you wish to self-edit, you should have some understanding of how style can impact your edit. The different style books can be your guide in learning how to treat numbers and punctuation.
5. Weaving the storyline. You may not outline your work as you go along, but when you self-edit, you should take some time to sketch out the structure of the story. This can help ensure continuity of the plot and strengthen your work as you review your draft.

What do you want to know about self-editing? I'll answer some questions in future posts, so ask away!

Elizabeth King Humphrey received a certificate in editing from the University of Chicago's Graham School. She lives, writes, and edits in coastal North Carolina.

Display Comments Add a Comment

Display Comments Add a Comment

Add a Comment

Some of my favorite building blocks for reviewing building blocks: Style, the guide to punctuation, The Chicago Manual of Style, Words into Type, and Garner's Modern American Usage

Among the other crazy things I’m planning for this June, I am taking a class on emerging technologies. I'm learning some basic coding--a heavy dose of HTML and a dollop of CSS. While I am starting to "get" looking at basic HTML coding and noting where a bracket or two is missing, I haven't quite learned the language fluently. But I’m able to recognize if there might be a missing piece.

At the same time, I'm designing a self-editing class and looking at elements I want to include in the course. Based on my HTML course, I think I’ve determined that returning to a review of our building blocks may be essential.

In my own writing, I will sometimes take shortcuts. And my grammar will suffer. (It’s like I’ve forgotten that I have a base for my language!)

When you write, you probably have fluidity because you use your (native) language skills in so many ways throughout any given day. But what happens if you are learning a new language for the first time or reviewing a foreign language you knew in high school? You return to the building blocks of the language and review what each means and, generally, review how the blocks fit together.

When you are editing your own work, do you slow down and really look that each sentence has a subject? What about an object? If you slow down to really look at your use of language--whether it's English, HTML or French—you should look at how each element of the sentence works to bring out the meaning you intended. Look at the building blocks to make sure they are there.

Often, as native speakers, we figure we’ve learned enough language skills and any mention of grammar makes our palms sweat. There are so many moving pieces to keep in mind. But I would encourage that every once in a while, you take a good look at the building blocks of language. Even a quick glance at an editing or grammar book can give your writing a boost. You might even learn a thing or two to improve your writing. Right now, I’m enjoying The Mentor Guide to Punctuation, which I picked up at a book sale. It helps me relax from learning HTML.

Do you have a favorite grammar book that you dip into regularly? What is one grammar problem you know you make, but do it anyway? What would you like to see in an editing class to help you improve your own writing?

Elizabeth King Humphrey is a writer and editor. She lives in North Carolina and frequently pulls out her blocks to play.

Display Comments Add a Comment

Today I have a great article about the craft of writing from writing coach Suzanne Lieurance.

How to Write Tight - Self-Editing Tips to Make Your Manuscript Ready For Publication

by Suzanne Lieurance

As writers, we hear it all the time. We need to "write tight", which just means we need to trim all the flab from our manuscripts and make every word count.

Here are some self-editing tips that will help you "write tight" and take your manuscripts from flabby to fit for publication in no time!

1. Avoid a lot of back story - information about the POV character's history and background. Weave all this into the story instead of loading the manuscript down with too many sentences or paragraphs of straight narrative before the action begins.

2. Simplify your sentences wherever possible. Watch for redundant or unnecessary phrases. As writers, we need to "show, not tell" as often as possible. Yet, some writers tend to show and then tell the same information, which is redundant. Watch out for this in your manuscripts. Also, look for the redundant phrases below and others like them.

Stand up = stand
Sit down = sit
Turned around = turned
He thought to himself = He thought
She shrugged her shoulders = she shrugged
She whispered softly = she whispered
He nodded his head = he nodded

3. Avoid adverbs for the most part. Use strong, descriptive verbs instead.

Flabby: She smiled slightly at the photographer.
Fit: She grinned at the photographer.

4. Avoid using the same word over and over in a paragraph. Go back and reread each sentence. Have you repeated the same word several times within a single sentence or paragraph? If so, substitute another word with the same meaning.

5. Don't overuse names. Beginning writers tend to have the characters address each other by name too often. When you speak to a friend, you don't constantly say his name. Don't have your characters do this either. It doesn't ring true, and it draws the reader OUT of the story.

6. Limit the description in a dialogue tag. Again, beginning writers tend to load down the dialogue tags (the "he said, she said" part of the dialogue) with too many details. If you must describe what a character is doing AS he says something, put that information in a separate sentence, not in the dialogue tag. And keep it short.

7. Avoid participle phrases - particularly at the beginning of sentences. Participle phrases end in the letters -ing. Go back over every page of your manuscript and circle the places where you've started a sentence with a participle phrase. If your manuscript is loaded down with participle phrases it tends to distract the reader and pull him out of the story.

8. No idle chit-chat. Be sure the dialogue advances the storyline. Readers don't need to hear the characters talking about anything that doesn't somehow relate directly to what's happened so far or what will happen next or later in the story.

9. Minimize use of the passive voice. Here's an example of passive voice: The ball was hit by Susan. Here's the same information in active voice: Susan hit the ball.

10. Use active, descriptive verbs.
Flabby: I was the one who made the decision to go home.
Fit: I decided to go home.

Strengthen weak verbs. You can usually eliminate was and were by replacing them with stronger, more descriptive verbs. Usually, was and were precede an -ing word, and you can change the -ing word to make it stronger.

Flabby:He was talking to my brot

Display Comments Add a Comment

Display Comments Add a Comment

A bunch of us around here were participating in NaNoWriMo this year and sharing our individual NaNo progress. I was one of them. And I'm proud to say, I 'won' again this year (YAY!)! But now that the euphoria of having a brand new finished manuscript has died down, I realized I now have to edit this story (BOO!).

Not my favorite part.

As a freelance proofreader/editor I can tell you that it's much easier for me to edit another author's work than my own. I can rip a manuscript apart, suggest ways to beef up the plot, help to tighten dialogue and even guide the author to make their characters more endearing to the reader. So why the heck is it so hard to edit my own stuff?

I've come to the realization that it's because I'm too close...too intimate...to my own story. Self-editing is tough because we need to let go of the idea that the story is our 'baby' and be just as hard and critical on our own writing as we'd be reviewing someone else's work. (Actually, I don't really have a problem with being critical of my own work...I'm my own worst enemy sometimes. HA!) Here are some things I do as a freelance editor when reviewing a manuscript that I will have to do on my own manuscript:

1) Content edit: When I'm doing a content edit, I give the story a close read--beginning to end--and I ask questions such as: Does this story have a solid plot? Does it make sense? Is the storyline engaging? Does it capture me from the start? Does each chapter have a hook at the beginning and a mini-cliffhanger at the end (that's what keeps readers away all night saying, "Just one more chapter!")? Do I know where the author is taking me on this journey (eg: where is the story located?) Are the characters believable? Are they engaging? Does the author breathe life into them so I can see, hear and feel them? Is the dialogue solid? Is there more show than tell? Is there a gradual peak in the storyline? Is the ending satisfying (or at least makes sense)? Are there, what one of my wonderful writing mentors calls, 'red herrings' sprinkled throughout the story to make me want to keep on reading? These are more but these are the general and, I feel, most important questions to address. These are what make a story solid. Starting with answering these questions will kick your editing in the butt.

2) Line edit: This part of editing is the nitty-gritty, picky stuff. Once all the story has the solid base, you read it through again to check for things like: Is the punctuation spot on? Is the grammar perfect (or as close to it as possible)? Is the dialogue conversational (This is so important. Nothing slows a story down more than dialogue that rambles on endlessly. Think of real-life conversations that do the same thing...ugh!)? Are commas under control? Are paragraphs tightened up? Are there any spelling words (this means making sure words that you check for synonyms or other things that spell check 'fixes' that don't need to be)? This is all the fussy stuff that helps the story read well. And, believe me, when you're getting reviews red marks in this area after it's gone through edits can make the difference between a 3 star and a 5 star rating.

3) Proofreading: This involves more than just making sure all the above things are taken care of. It also means you make sure to check for things like line spacing, format, tabs and other things that editors really hate having to fix or mess around with. This is like the final run-through.

There you go. OH! And one more good idea is to have a writing mentor or buddy read your book over one last time to mak

Display Comments Add a Comment

We’ve been talking about editing this month on the Children’s Book Hub. Even though I myself am a freelance children’s book editor as well as an author, I rely heavily on my collaborations with editors – at our publishing house, as well as on a freelance basis.

My mother and I are fortunate to work with truly gifted editors at our publishing houses – but for my own independent projects I always seek feedback from a freelance editor (such as Emma D. Dryden, whom I interviewed this month for the Hub).  You see, I’m not very good at editing myself.

There are many good reasons to work with a freelance editor in today’s publishing world – but here is perhaps the most compelling one:  Once a manuscript has been rejected, it will seldom be reconsidered by that same publisher… even if you rewrite it.  So it’s very important to get it as polished as we can be before the submission process begins, and the best way I know to do that is to hire a freelance editor.

That said, there are a number of things we can do to become better self-editors, to get our manuscripts into the best possible shape even before we submit them to a freelance editor… and I thought, given this month’s focus on editing, I’d explore some of them. Here’s one for those of you who use Microsoft Word:

Use the Find and Replace and Thesaurus tools.

“Find and replace” is the most efficient way to replace overused words. For instance, I tend to overuse the word “wonderful”. It crops up all the time in what I’m writing and it drives me insane. What I do is write, write, write – and when I’m done, I click “Find” (under the Edit tab), type in the word “wonderful” and each time the tool pulls it up in the manuscript I choose a better word to replace it with (using the “Thesaurus” tool – or the real, bound Thesaurus if I get stuck!)

If you want to change a character’s name, you can use the find and replace tool to pull up all the “Mickey’s” and change them to “Mikey” in one mouse click. You can click “find next” and walk through the manuscript word by word, or you can click “find all” and do a global replace on a word or name.

Among the things you might want to ‘find and replace’ (with better choices from your Thesaurus!) are:

• Cheap or cheesy modifiers (very, just, etc.)
• Passive verbs / tentative or weak sentence construction (was going, been having, seemed, felt etc.)
• Words you use too often (wonderful, like, suddenly, little)
• Adverbs that prop up weak verbs
• A character’s name (Replace All)

Add a Comment

Okay, time for an apology and a procedural note. We've been trying to include the Twitter handles for the folks we include in the round-up, wherever we can find them. Unfortunately, having to leave Google Reader to hunt for them on the individual blogs or, in some cases, search through Twitter, is slowing us down to the point where continuing would jeopardize our ability to keep doing the round-up. While we're sorry to have to do it, we're going to retreat to including just the teaser in the tweets unless we happen to know the twitter handle by heart.

If you would like us to keep including the twitter handle (and this request will likely apply to other bloggers or tweeters who do a round-up) it would be very helpful if you would put it somewhere either at the top or bottom of the post.

Thanks and apologies,

Martina



After the Sale

• The flip side of self-promotion [Writer Unboxed] Six things you must do in a world where publishers no longer have budgets to market your book.
• That Thing You Want to Know.... [Author/Agent Mandy Hubbard] Will writing make you rich? @MandyHubbard breaks down a six-figure deal.
• Authors Must Learn to Sell What They Write [Writers in the Sky E-zine] Fifteen things you should do to market your books. via @writersinthesky
• 20 Awesome YA Book Trailers [GotYA] Need inspiration for your book trailer? Twenty great ones. via @Annie_McElfresh
• Best of the Web Book Marketing Tips for the Week of April 25, 2011 [Author Marketing Experts, Inc.Get Published Tips and Book Marketing Advice from Penny Sansevieri] Good recap of this week's best posts on book marketing. via @Bookgal

Book Reviews

• 101 SUCCESS SECRETS by Christine Fonseca [YA Author Elana Johnson] Brilliant review of @chrstinef's 101 Success Secrets for Gifted Kids by @ElanaJ's son. Sounds great!
• Blogoversary Giveaway #3 - Spring Reads Prize Pack [Confessions of a Bookaholic] Enter by 5/31 to win ARCs of BETWEEN HERE AND FOREVER and STAY. via @TotalBookaholic
• Happy Release Day - Moonglass [Market My Words] Great review of Jessi Kirby's MOONGLASS by @srjohannes. Happy Release Day, Jesse!
• Read the First Two Chapters of POSSESSION! [YA Author Elana Johnson] Dying to read more POSSESSION? Get the first two chapters via @ElanaJ.
• "damn those kids and their recurring need to eat!" [Janet Reid, Literary Agent] Need a phenomenal read? @QueryShark says COUNTY LINE!
• A Book Review and a Book Festival [Write About Now] A great review for Katherine Hannigan's TRUE. via @SherriePetersen