Whether it’s shorter form essay or blog writing, or your first story masterpiece of hundreds of thousands of words, it can sometimes feel like climbing a really steep mountain (with no trail, mind you) to get from beginning to end.

I’ve found myself procrastinating on writing my blogs (I know, having more than one could be part of the problem . . .) regularly. Also a book I’m working on (about physics and metaphysics).

I was reminded recently that one of the beauties of having no path is that you then have lots of choices in how you go up that writing mountain. The only important thing is to be willing and focused enough to stay in the writing mode of activity. No fair substituting knitting (or Youtube videos) for writing (drat!).

Explore All the Options

Jean said that if I’m finding myself blocked about writing something, I should explore all the different ways I can be writing. I have plenty of unfinished projects, so it’s easy to see the options (copy for my tarot deck book, poems, blog posts on editing, a single chapter in my physics/metaphysics book, etc.). If I’m just not feeling bloggable, I can work a poem or write up the description and message for a tarot card. Somehow just telling me that makes it easier to get started on . . . something writing. Small bites are so much easier.

Take a Lesson from Other Writers

And Jean’s admonition to use just the discipline to keep writing something, also reminded me of another writing lesson I learned from a writer’s group I helped with last year: find your best writing ritual or context; what works for others may not work for you. We had several dedicated writers in the group who had invested a tidy sum in this coaching effort, but it was still difficult for them to stay focused on writing. The successful storytellers have found quite different ways to keep going. One stays connected to nature to stay motivated and writes almost every day. Another gets up and writes the same time every morning when others in the family are still asleep. A third found that she had to set aside retreat time away from home to get the words down; daily discipline didn’t work for her.

So, in the spirit of The Artist’s Way, but not necessarily every morning (set your own time pattern), write something. You’ll be done before you know it. And then you can email me to see about getting your masterpiece edited.

The Purpose

When I work with a self-publishing author, I begin by proposing a manuscript evaluation, which is the first step in developmental editing. This first pass gives the writer an overall idea of whether or not their story line and characters (for fiction) or topic organization and narrative (nonfiction) actually hold the reader’s interest.

The Process Compared to Copy Editing

Instead of going into sentence detail to focus on grammar and other writing mechanics, I keep my mind on reading for content and story progression. For fiction, I track characters and look for lapses in how the writer describes them and makes them behave. I also track the plot sequence to see if there’s anything that doesn’t make sense as I go along. And finally, I just get a feel for how the whole thing works (or doesn’t) for a reader. Fiction or nonfiction, I want to remain curious but not confused. There can be mystery, but the writer needs to create it consciously. Let me step fully into your story and go along for the ride (or the flight)!

The Joy of the ME

I find manuscript evaluation to be extremely satisfying work. I have my own creative writing (mostly poetic in form—keeps me from rambling), but I love being able to contribute in this way to another writer’s creation. It’s like watching a flower bloom or a child discover her own drawing skill.

I also enjoy the more mechanical aspects of copy editing and proofreading, but this work of supporting stories is just goosebumps to the extreme.

PS: Let me know when I can help you meet your geni(e)us.

When I first read this article on a conversation between novelist Donna Tartt and publisher/editor Michael Pietsch, I could definitely see Tartt’s frustration in dealing with editors in the past, which pretty much solidified her wish to stand out by rebelling against “the rules.” I’ll bet she does write readable, comprehensive prose, though, or she wouldn’t be as successful as she is. So, she’s playing by some “rules.” She just doesn’t want to feel that rules are rigidly imposed upon her by outsiders who are applying some semi-arbitrary style book to her creative work.

Pietsch brought up the “invisible hand” issue about editing (which is more influential in substantive/developmental editing than in copy editing or proofreading) and his tone itself stressed the importance of understanding that we editors are challenging, to a certain extent, the writer’s ownership of their creation. We are participating (although mostly anonymously) in the creative process, and therefore a diplomatic and flexible approach (particularly for fiction, I would imagine) is called for. We can’t retreat into some stereotypical Puritanical grammar-lady mode and be of any real assistance to the writer.

Even Tartt admitted that rules might be a good idea for, say, journalism and probably other nonfiction writing, where a standardized approach to communication will create a smooth read for folks who are reading to understand a structure or process. But a “smooth read” is also important for fiction, I think. When I read fiction, I want to get “sucked in” to the writer’s world, to get to a point where I don’t feel like I’m reading words on a page, but actually observing and emotionally participating in the story. I want to come away from the book feeling as if I am still haunted by my experience for a while. I read mostly science fiction and fantasy, so maybe reading more realistic fiction is different, but I doubt it. If the writer’s prose is filled with confusing sentences or even confusing plot process or characterizations that don’t make sense, then my reading experience will be frustrating.

There’s room for individual style, but stretching that grammatical fabric too far does a disservice to the reader (unless you are writing experimental prose for a niche academic audience—I’ve seen how that works). It becomes a balancing act for the editor(s) to be good helpers in supporting the author’s writing and also representatives of the reader and the principles of comprehension. I think it’s funny that editors and proofreaders are so often seen as rigid rule-appliers when, in my experience at least, we’ve had to make so many subjective, contextual calls on best practice based not on a set of rules, but on how the written structure best serves the story the writer is telling.

That’s me, then. Your ally in providing a great reading experience for your audience. First thing I do when I see a manuscript is to follow the writer’s style, figure out how it works, and then only step in to “interfere” when I, as just a reader, find myself stopped and confused, or if I see that the writer’s intent has been sabotaged by his or her own human tendency to forget to be consistent about character personality, the use of words or capitalization, or whatever.

I am here to be of service to you, not to take over ownership of your creative work. If I want ownership, then I’ll write my own books. The only thing I ask is to be given an open-minded consideration of my recommendations. The decision is still yours, dear writer, as is the ownership of your content.