What makes you think you've beaten Sturgeon's Law?

My work gets better when I rewrite it, but it doesn't usually get good until someone else edits it. I don't think I'll ever reach the point where I can write a good story without help (and I hope I never reach the point where I think I can.)

Editing and rewriting for me happen after I've written a fair bit (3 or 4 chapters for long compositions) or each work (short). Generally, I leave myself a cool-off period of about a week before I start doing that, though. If not more. The more time between the initial write-up and the edit/ rewrite, the cooler my head. Rinse, repeat for about three times (at various stages for longer works - depending on how much rework needs doing). Tada!

Thank God for Word Processors and the trusty delete key.

EDIT: I guess most people don't chat about edits, because... well, if it's not yours, it's pretty darned boring. Building, at least, is the bounce-ideas stage. That is more fun for other people.

edited 1st Feb '12 11:33:18 AM by Euodiachloris

A good point.

Of course, I'm sure there are some people who believe their work is perfect as soon as they've written it down...

Couldn't agree with you more, Jackson. It's very nice and refreshing to see a troper talk so frankly about the writing process and what it really entails.

I don't think whether or not my work is any good is up to me to decide, really. I'll leave that to publishers and readers.

@ Jackson and his excellent post.

I've been asking for opinions about my first book for almost three years, now, before publishing. The "initial final version" of the book had barely 130 pages. Things happened way too quickly and easily. Conversations were childish. Descriptions were lazy. Things that were supposed to be serious and epic were narmy. I was a bad writer.

However, the central idea of the story was too important for me, and I wouldn't allow it to be undermined by my lack of experience with writing. I read books and articles concerning writing and even sent my (sci-fi) book to a physics doctor so I could learn to improve the accuracy of the depiction of physics. Not a single chapter was left without rewriting. Several characters and obstacles were added. Every conversation was revised and innumerable typos were fixed. Currently, the first book of my series has about 250 pages.

Still, whenever I think it's ready, I read it again and find and fix several other things. I don't think I'm done, yet.

There, now you've seen it.

edited 1st Feb '12 2:01:40 PM by Teraus

I figured people didn't talk about editing their work because it's so obviously necessary, it goes without saying (or should, maybe).

Howabout this; the moment I get published, the moment my writing has been through editing, editing, editing and come away with a piece of writing experienced publishers think people will buy. Right now, I am the 90%. Right now, I'm working on it. I believe that, if I shut up and just keep trying, eventually I'll be good enough.

Sturgeon's Law accounts for material produced, in thus context, not the producers.

Honestly, I have no ability to self-evaluate. I thought my CYOA was pretty good when it was bland and uninspired. My entry for the next writing contest almost went straight into the recycling and several people have told me it's the best thing I've ever written.

I am unable to gauge the amount of editing that goes into my work, as most of it does not happen upon the page. Passages will be assembled in my head an re-edited for hours while I engage in other activities, a final version occurring as they are typed. They could be unchanged or they could have undergone hours of seeking the perfect way to put this single line. Without physical effort expended I rarely remember which. Often there's also editing involved after they're on the page as well.

My contest entry was simply spewed forth unedited at all, but that's far from the norm.

It's interesting to look back on Dulling the Pain, the story that I referenced in a much earlier post here. At the time, I was pissed off at stories like Petaybee, and I wanted to do them one better. I created what I still think was a decent universe (albeit with physics as soft as butter), with a small but varied cast interacting within it. Then I sent it off to a volunteer editor, who didn't really change all that much.

Results were tepid. Batrachiarch (one of the writers I look up to) described it as "cheesy fun," but it hemorrhaged readers after the first few chapters.

From there, I tried my hand at a different story . . . Come to think of it, I can't remember whether I'd already written chapter 1 of Eternal, but I know this was when I wrote 2-12. I did most of the same stuff, but this time, I found Sessalisk, a very thorough editor who pointed out a lot of problems.

Again, I hemorrhaged readers (in retrospect, chapter 3 might have been too gruesome), but I found a core who genuinely liked the story.

I do think Sessalisk made most of the difference. Get yourselves a good editor, kids!