Now with beta-reader feedback

I’m constantly surprised at how iterative a novel is. Does this happen to everyone? I wrote the dang thing, revised it, tossed it out to beta readers (all this over the course of years, mind you). And I’m finding that, for this project, incorporating beta-reader feedback means layering in characterization and backstory that didn’t make it out of my head and onto the page the first go-round. I write on the spare side as it is–and already chucked the floppy aimless scenes during the first revision–so I’m not dealing with cutting down prose, as you often hear people talk about. I’ve also had to rewrite scenes from different POVs, which drives me batty, and have generally been neglecting short stories and the other novel.

I’ve ripped this novel apart and patched it back together so many times, but this feels like a different beast entirely. Even before putting fingers to keyboard, I gathered all the feedback and notes together, and just thought about the novel for weeks. Because the draft I have right now is fairly polished in terms of prose, my goal is to make this last pass of edits with surgical precision, disrupting as little as possible from the working parts of the story.

The process has gone something like this:

  1. Think furiously about my game plan.
  2. Read notes, compile meta feedback into a quick-reference document. Keep comments ordered by critiquer. Highlight the ones that resonate.
  3. Transfer novel to iPad in ebook format, so it feels like I’m reading an actual book rather than a manuscript–and to prevent massive rewriting at this stage. (Hat tip to Phoebe for the suggestion).
  4. Before each editing session, I reread the master feedback document. Well, at least every couple of sessions, to refresh.
  5. Read the novel, making annotations as needed.
  6. After I’ve gone through a solid chunk of the novel this way (usually a third), I then bust out my laptop and make edits to the actual manuscript. Up to this point I’ve only incorporated meta level comments. The idea is not to get bogged down in the line edits, and to keep in the forefront my overarching ideal for the story.
  7. Finally I fire up the individual beta-reader versions of the manuscript and go through line edits.
  8. Repeat steps 5-7 with rest of the novel.

In addition to the POV changes mentioned earlier, I realized I had a fairly mustache-twirly antagonist, and have been working hard to make him more realistic. I found some of the exercises in Donald Maass’ Writing the Breakout Novel Workbook to be immensely valuable in this regard. It was also quite the revelation to see that my tendency to shift POVs was directly proportional to how much suffering a character was experiencing. And I know better than that! I know that when writing third person limited, a typical technique is to select POV based on which character is in the most pain. But I must have had my blinders on in previous passes. Or really, I wasn’t ready to write that scene the way it needed to be written. And that’s okay. That’s what revision is for, right? Now, finally, the scene is fixed, and the story so much stronger for it. I love my beta readers.

What have your experiences been in incorporating beta-reader feedback into a WIP?

All-new short fiction revision checklist

I love watching my writing process evolve, and, in the spirit of process geekery, I thought it would be fun to share my current checklist for revising short fiction. The list itself is pretty short. Working through the list, on the other hand, is time-consuming, and depends on how long the piece is and how broken the story.

Also to be clear, I’m NOT talking about novels. They are a different beast entirely, and I shared some thoughts on novel revision in a recent post here.

For me, the selling point of this particular checklist, and the reason why I abandoned my previous checklist, is the theme-articulation step. This is taken straight out of Dan Decker’s Hollywood Formula, as presented by Lou Anders on Writing Excuses episode 6.18.. The Hollywood Formula kind of blew my mind. When I applied it to my writing, I found that my first drafts landed sort of near the target, but I was able to bring the stories into much sharper focus by thinking harder about the relationship between characters and theme. Or said another way, this technique allowed me to see the target, so that I could go back in my story and make it look like I was shooting straight the whole time.

Here’s the checklist:

  • Basic rewrite of existing story. Smooth prose.
  • Identify theme. Refocus story if need be. Ensure protagonist’s actions are consistent with theme. To do this, first establish the following:
    • What does the protagonist want?
    • Who is keeping the protagonist from getting what he wants? This is the antagonist.
    • Who accompanies the protagonist on his journey? This is the relationship character. The relationship character is the person who has been there and done that, and the theme is articulated to or by the relationship character. (Listen to the podcast for examples.)
    • The story ends when the protagonist achieves his goal, defeats the antagonist, and reconciles with the relationship character.
  • Optional: Evaluate structure. Print draft, get out scissors and tape. I don’t do this on every story, but sometimes it’s necessary.
  • Revisit beginning. Within the first three pages, I need to establish the following: Who is the protagonist? What is he or she doing, and why? Why should the reader should care, or in other words, what’s the hook? (See this Shimmer blog post by Ferrett Steinmetz for examples.) Or as Cat Valente would say, Get to the ghost pigs.
  • Revisit ending. Does my last line resonate?
  • Send out to critique group. Revise based on their feedback.
  • Read aloud/proofread. Fix anything I stumble over.
  • Submit.

This short fiction revision checklist is svelte compared to its previous incarnation. For instance, I used to have a checkbox for fine-tuning character motivations. (Does the protagonist change? Do the protagonist’s actions fit motivations? Are the protagonist’s motivations clear?) But I found that my theme-articulation step tends to address the issue of character motivation as well. Other items nixed from the list include improving beats and heightening tension, grooming for detail (trimming the fat and/or fleshing out, as needed), and grooming for voice. For now at least, I’m automatically taking care of these as I go through the revision, and long checklists stress me out.

So there you have it. How does this compare to your short story revision process?

On a different topic, earlier this week Fran laid down the gauntlet with her 2011 reading list, including a best-of-short-fiction collection. I don’t think I can do this (Goodreads for short stories, anyone? Anyone?), but I was toying with the idea of adding a semi-regular “What I’m listening to this week” blog post addendum. Because I love podcasts. Writing podcasts, science podcasts, fiction podcasts. And because I love sharing things I love. For this inaugural edition, we have

Drabblecast 225 – Trifecta XIX is a trio of fairy tale child abduction stories. Good and creepy.
AISFP 156, in which Sandra Wickham interviews author Dan Wells.
Escape Pod 319 – Driving X by Gwendolyn Clare is about chromosomes and dune buggies in a post-apocalyptic desert southwest.
Writing Excuses has two great recent episodes, one on character foils, the other on common problems with endings.
I also really enjoyed the Blood Work episode on Stuff You Missed in History Class, about murder and 16th century blood transfusions. Unfortunately their website makes me crazy, and I couldn’t find a link to the actual episode.

Happy Listening!