Bill Conrad's Blog - Posts Tagged "editing"

When I finished my first book, it was around 100,000 words. To me, that seemed to be far too short. So, I want back and added a bunch of stuff which ballooned the word count to approximately 140,000 words. My reasoning was that great books should as big as possible and I wanted a massive volume that dominated any shelf.
After my additions, my book went through a long process. In all the reviews and editing, a bunch of areas was trimmed down. The majority of the trimming came from the material I had added. This was a difficult process that took a lot of effort.
One way to look at this trimming is a quality versus quantity argument. Essentially, there were many pages that added no story value. Another viewpoint is to trim away fluff. When Michelangelo was asked how he made the statue of David, he responded, “It was easy. I just chipped away the stone that didn’t look like David.”
Since my first book, I’ve had a lot of time to reflect on my writing philosophy and process. I’ve come to understand that it defiantly was a mistake to write for maximum length. Books are about story and when the story drones on, readers won’t be impressed. Since my first book, I’ve adopted a different approach and I start by creating an outline. From there, I move sections around to set the overall flow.
Is there an ideal book length? At the beginning of the writing process, I did some research and the general length that publishers want is 120,000 words. I try to shoot for this general length at the outline stage. How? I make my outlines around 5 pages. To me, that kind of works out to 120,000 words and I think that’s a good goal. Stay tuned for a later blog where I share my chaotic outline process.
Well, how many acts does a 120,000-word book need to have? I have no idea. I don’t even know how many acts my present works have because I never analyzed my books in that way. Well, how many chapters should there be? A chapter is there to break up the flow. It also allows readers a good point to pause for the evening. Some of my chapters are really long and some are really short. I am trying to be much better at having even chapter lengths. Keeping this in mind at the outline stage helps.
What about the little things that add to the length? Adding descriptions of scenes, characters, emotions, and thoughts. I confess that I’m not that good at general descriptions. After my first draft, I have to go back and enhance the scenes. Is this an effort to make the book longer? I suppose, but that’s not my goal in updating these sections. My goal is to get the visualization out of my head and onto the page.
What sizes of books do I like to read? When I first pop a book into my Calibre reader, it tells me the page count at the bottom. In general, they are ~900 pages. (This is an arbitrary number generated by the reader.) To me, I like stories that are this general length. For this blog, I did a check and that just happens to be right around 110,000 words. However, I really like Ken Follett’s long in-depth stories and they are far longer than 900 pages.
It seems, that this blog has come full circle. What is the best number of words in a book? I suppose the answer is whatever you want it to be. What should the goal of a writer be with regards to length? A good goal is 120,000 words, but that’s a starting point. If the work ends up longer or shorter, that’s just fine. The main takeaway for me is not to think in terms of length with regards to writing a book. Wow, short blog this week.

Years ago, I came across the book “The PC is Not a Typewriter” by Robin Williams. No this isn’t the “Good Morning Vietnam” Robin Williams. His book described how to make the transition from a typewriter to a word processor. It further described the many bad habits that were brought over from the typewriter.
When I was growing up, my father had an IBM Selectric typewriter that he pumped out several books with. When I was about 10, I used his typewriter to write reports, but it didn’t help too much because I made so many mistakes. Yes, in those days whiteout was my best friend. Around that time, we got our first computer. A Wang with a giant daisy wheel printer. It had an excellent word processor (for the time) and I got rather good at creating documents on it. However, it was still essentially an elaborate typewriter with very limited spell checking. Still, it was a lifesaver.
Later, there were word processors that had many fonts and a graphical method of viewing [typesetting] the document. This was a huge improvement for everybody. However, some bad writing traits remained. For example, it’s no longer necessary to add 2 spaces after a period. Way back when, this was essential for mechanical typesetting, but now that practice wastes paper. Another is monospaced fonts and old fonts like Times New Roman which is still the gold standard. We also have wide margins around the edges of the page, double spacing, ALL CAPITOL LETTERS and using spaces instead of tabs for alignment.
Fortunately, there have been some improvements that we have embraced. A really big one is the ability to import from other sources. For example, if I was writing a book about the The Metropolitan Museum of Art, I could copy that text from the internet and it will be spelled correctly. See, I just did it.
The internet is another superb resource. For example, it can be used as a spell checker. Let’s take the word, Metropolitan and pretend that I typed, “Metrooplatin.” Looks right? But, none of the suggested correctly spelled words from the word processor look correct. If we paste this word into a search engine, often it will auto-suggest the correct word and then pulls up a dictionary. Neat trick.
Modern word processors also allow us to import pictures, share documents, easily change the format, merge the text around objects and preview before printing. The internet allows us to change the document into a different language, find new sources of content, check facts and it has many guide for improving your writing.
I now use Ariel font for everything I can, I delete the second space, never use ALL CAPITOL LETTERS and use tabs for alignment. I also look for tips and tricks within my word processor to aid my writing. A new one is the add-in Grammarly. It really helps find those grammar problems and makes my documents read better.
Overall, writers can focus on their words and let the computer take care of everything else. They can also use the internet as a fact checker, thesaurus, “urban” dictionary, source of material and a means of distribution. The overall point I am attempting to make is that we now have the endless freedom to make our documents read and look better much better. My computer is no longer just a typewriter it is a word powerhouse. While I desperately wish the world would change from Times New Roman to Ariel font, I never want to go back to a typewriter.

When I think of an editor, I picture an old person hunched over a desk with stacks of paper in massive organized piles. They magically know how to spell every single word, have the entire thesaurus memorized and they have all the knowledge in the universes. Just like Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Terminator, they find every single mistake and they never sleep.
In some ways, this far-out description is true. Editors do find most mistakes and they are relentless in this effort. However, they are much more than that. They check facts, look at flow, move sections around, check logic, change descriptions, delete junk and make comments.
Authors write from their single perspective and this is the really good editors take over. For example, an author might use the word “trippy” 5 times on each page. Of course, this reads just fine to the author. The editor would see this tick and reduce this word use. The result is that the reader isn’t annoyed by word overuse. This is part of an overall effort to develop a universally appreciated document.
This example also highlights a major failing of programs like Grammarly. An author could write trippy in every sentence and as long as it’s grammatically correct, all would be fine. One of my habits is to describe something and two sentences later, I describe the same thing again. I’m not sure why I do this, I guess, it’s my logical nature. Programs like Grammarly would never catch this mistake. I have read many posts about how editors are now obsolete because of programs like Grammarly. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Editors also have to look at the structure, flow and overall tone. They might delete sentences, move them around and add comments. For example, “Expand this section. More about the motivation. This doesn’t make any sense. Unnecessary, consider deleting.” They also check facts and logic. For example, “WWII ended in 1955.” A simple mistake like that would really upset readers. Programs like Grammarly will never be able to know what to do with a sentence like that. Does this story contain an alternate reality where this is a true statement? Is this statement from a student that incorrectly answered a question? Or is it a genuine mistake? Either way, it’s essential to prevent major mistakes from reaching the reader's eyes.
There is, of course, a downside to working with an editor. First, they make me depressed that my grammar isn’t better. They also bland the overall tone. An author might write a great colloquialism, “Dis is a funky-fresh day. Yo!!” The editor changes it to, “This is a nice day.” To me, their efforts take away the edge, but the result is much more universally understandable.
To me, the worst part of working with an editor is when they confront you with the fact that something just isn’t working. You have failed as a writer and it’s a really hard pill to swallow. My only condolence is that in life, the hardest lessons are the most important.
It is essential to locate a good editor. I looked up many reviews before selecting one. Editors are people and they have quirks, strong opinions, ethics and they make mistakes. To further complicate matters, an author can work with 2 or 3 of them. One editor thinks a sentence should read one way and the other likes it another way. The author turns into a rag doll that is just trying to get a book out.
Another difficult part of working with an editor is that they are expensive. Typically $40-75 per hour. As a self-published author, this expense represents a major burden. However, to be taken seriously, good editing is essential.
There are some ways to reduce editing costs. The first is to self-edit a lot. This means going over your work at least 20 times. The second is to show your work to friends. Even if they don’t have a writing background, they can be extremely useful. You want comments like, “This section doesn’t make any sense. Why did Bob leave the house? You keep saying trippy.” These comments are gold mines. The result is a more powerful document that the editor can better apply their skills instead of mucking about with trivial stuff.
Editors are a writer’s best friend. They make the difference between a rabble of words and a polished document.

I can spend hours self-editing. I am constantly tweaking sentences and making other little adjustments. There is no pressure to create something new and I can make any change I want. To me, this process is relaxing and the best part of being an author.
I read countless posts where other authors hate to self-edit. They find it tedious and boring. I have also read posts from authors that meticulously self-edit for years. I suspect these authors have had more experience with critics dramatically pointing out their errors and it gives them much anguish. I have had some harsh criticism, but not at an extreme level. Perhaps that is why the process is still fun as there is no real pressure.
I make at least 20 passes before my book goes to my beta reader. The main improvement revolves around the flow. I try to ease the burden on the reader so they are not distracted by confusing sentences. Often this means moving, expanding, breaking up and combing sentences. While the same information is still conveyed, the sentences read much better.
Another aspect I check on is the logic. Last night, I discovered that I had been referring to rooms on a ship as bedrooms and not cabins. A simple search found all the instances where I had made this obvious mistake. Last week I found a subtle issue where the character was lying down and they walked away. I changed it to say they stood up and then walked away. While this may not seem like a major issue, it is a good example of something a reader should never encounter. Logic errors disrupt a reader’s concentration. A big error can upset a reader and translate to a bad review.
Another pass revolved around facts. Ideally, a book will be read by many people. These people will have wide backgrounds, vast experiences, and a completely independent perspective. So, it is very important to check every single fact before a reader gets it.
The majority of my self-editing starts by randomly selecting a page and start reading. I find all kinds of little things to change. During this time, I have no plan. Sometimes, I jump to another section and sometimes, I jump to another book.
Overall, this process is still fun. I do get a bit of a kick when I stumble across a good mistake. I clean it up and there is satisfaction over fixing the problem. Later, when I re-read that section, I can see the improvement. I think in a well-written work; the words seem to glide rather than bunch up.
Of course, with a big book, there are hundreds of opportunities to make all kinds of mistakes and eventually, the author has to stop self-editing. To me, that is a sad day. It is also a happy day because others can now view my work. Intimidating? Of course, it is, but all that hard work pays off with a nice compliment.

The program Grammarly is a great tool that saves time, money and makes my life better. Its purpose is to do a better job of grammar checking than the built-in grammar checking programs. The result is a document that reads better due to less grammatical errors.
There are of course critics and they point out that all grammar-checking programs make mistakes. They also point out that the result of these programs make documents read bland and they lack the raw spark of an un-proofread document. Anti-big brother critics also point out that Grammarly sends the document to a server to be processed which is a security and privacy issue.
For me, I am grateful for any help I can get. Good documents show readers how much effort an author puts into their work. Bad grammar trips up readers and causes negative comments.
On a personal level, it is no secret that my grammar is at best fair. The term “fair” is an upgrade from “poor.” I attribute this upgrade to two factors. The first is that my writing efforts have improved my grammar abilities. The second is that the English language bar has been lowered by the internet. Anybody to publish, post, unintentionally share their work. As a result, every conceivable document is available for public viewing and the vast majority of them haven’t been proofread.
When I use Grammarly, I use it like any other tool. I evaluate its suggestions and make changes where I feel appropriate. Overall, I like its suggestions and it is clear that the tool is getting better.
Grammarly does have its drawbacks. It’s very slow and it has big gaps. For example, it trips up on using the word “who” as opposed to “whom.” It also misses the big picture such as putting in paragraph breaks or adding quotes. Grammarly also does not process slang, intentional poor grammar or technical terms.
Even with its drawbacks, I see a big improvement in my documents. They look more professional and I find the errors they catch to be true mistakes. I see a big future with programs like Grammarly. AI is going to make a massive contribution in this area. Microsoft now has a big gap exposed in its product and I look forward to their response. With some luck, the overall quality of all documents will be raised.

I spend up to 16 hours per week self-editing. At the beginning of my writing adventure, I didn’t have much structure. I read and made corrections where I saw fit. Overall, I enjoyed this activity. It feels like reading a familiar story and casually making it better. I now understand that while this type of editing improves the story, it leads to unintended issues.
The problems occur when I edit without a particular plan and forget about the big picture. I define the big picture as a book that readers would like to read. More specifically, I do not want to upset the readers with bad writing. Self-editing can result in meandering junk unrelated to the core of the story. My favorite damage invoking activity involves taking a deep dive into thoroughly explaining the characters motives, logic and brilliance. While this is occasionally necessary and insightful, it disrupts the flow resulting in a confused/uninspired reader.
To make matters worse, I discovered a strange self-editing/writing habit. After I create a sentence, I explain the same topic in the next sentence. “Bob walked to the door, opened it and looked inside. After opening the door, he continued walking.” I have no idea why I repeat myself. I suspect that I subconsciously really want the reader to thoroughly understand the topic. Perhaps my engineering mind likes to play.
After a lot of wasted time self-editing the wrong way, I have cobbled together a self-editing procedure and I thought it would be interesting to share. It begins during my initial writing. After I get a few pages written, I go back and casually edit/read them before writing new story. I identify areas were the plot isn’t clear and I shore it up with facts and insight. I also delete junk that isn’t necessary and move sections around.
When the book is finished, I do a full basic pass. I have several specific issues that I seek out. This included my famous double sentences, logic errors and unclear concepts. I also check facts and think about the flow. “Bob died in the horrific car crash.” Later in the book, “Bob and James shared a cup of coffee.” Wait a minute. I thought Bob died? What’s going on? Readers and critics hate that kind of basic mistake.
I often find instances where I used the wrong name for a character or referred to a section of the book where I have removed/changed some fact. The worst writing mistake I found so far is a duplicated sentence that probably resulted from a copy/paste error.
When I have completed my first pass, I start the program Pro Writing Aid. This is an intelligent document checking Microsoft Word add-in with many features. I start by checking for overused words. Gahhh. I hate this part of the editing process. It points out tight concentrations of words [for example, having three sentences in a paragraph beginning with “In general the…”] and other words that should be limited in their use. It’s favorite word to cheerfully locate is “was.” Each one of these feels like a bee sting and it takes a lot of creative effort to rearrange all the sentences. However, the resulting sentences are stronger and it flows better. Overall, this is the longest part of the self-editing process. I also noticed something else. Overused words are concentrated around weak sentences. There must be some sort of subconscious element at work.
Next, I make a full pass using the style improvement program in Pro Writing Aid. This generally goes quickly as it suggests better ways of phrasing sentences and eliminating certain words. The result is a document that reads cleaner and sounds professional.
Then I do a Pro Writing Aid Grammar check. This finds lots of errors and it a bit slower than the style improvement program. Unfortunately, it makes me feel like a grammar bonehead. Fortunately, by this stage of editing, many of the grammar issues have been uncovered.
My final check is to use the free version of the Grammar check add-in, Grammarly. The problem with this program is that it takes about ten minutes to get started. Once inside the document, it highlights several good grammar issues. Its best feature is to locate words that sound the same, but are spelled differently (homonyms, homophones, homographs and heteronyms. Oh my.)
However, there are problems with Grammarly and Pro Writing Aid. The first one is that they disagree with each other and overall end up loading my document up the commas. The second problem occurs when I disagree with their edits. The resulting sentences don’t read well. This forces me to make a choice. Do I go with the advice from a professional program written by language experts? Or does grammar bonehead Bill take the leap? 95% of the time, I go with the professionals. So my writing ends up with lots of commas.
After I have made my final checks, I give my work to my beta reader, my mom. She takes a much higher approach. “This area does not make sense.” “What was Bob’s motivation to go home?” “This area is weak.” “Consider deleting.” “Expand.” I greatly appreciate her input and I put in a lot of effort to fulfil her suggestions. I then enter a new round of self-editing including Pro Writing Aid and Grammarly. Typically, this goes a lot faster.
One final pass and I send my book to a professional editor. I now understand that I need to accept all their suggestions and limit my corrections. Then a copy editor finds nit-picky little things and the book goes onto Amazon.
Wow, that is a long ordeal. It took a lot of wasted time to figure out this process. Self-editing is a must for an author. Or am I a perfectionist who loves to self-edit? Something to think about…

I spend 0 to 4 hours a day self-editing. This task is necessary because my English skills are not the best, I often change my mind and I am an uncoordinated perfectionist. Not the best combination. However, I see the improvements and my later works require a lot less editing.
After thinking about my process, I determined that I have a 1:20 ratio of writing to editing. I thought it would be interesting to take a high-level view of my process.
When I write, I work in 1-2 hour stretches. A first draft takes 3-6 months depending on a lot of factors. I begin each writing session by starting three pages back from where I ended. As I read over these pages, I edit the existing work and then start writing where I left off. I do this to get into the mood, flow, characters and plot. Of the total editing effort, this preview-edit changes the document by approximately 5%.
While writing, I often have inspirations and make changes. 80% of the changes occur at this stage. This included adding chapters, rearranged large sections and making character modifications. However, this effort does not meet the definition of editing; I consider it to be writing.
After I have finished my first draft, I do my first full self-edit. My primary goal is to improve the flow, check my logic, and locate significant issues. This first pass is brutal, and it takes at least a month. I estimate this represents 15% of editing changes.
After the first pass, I then edit with specific goals in mind. One pass improves the descriptions; another fixes dialog, and another addresses my known writing “ticks.” This covers 5% of self-edited changes. When I feel comfortable, I do a comprehensive look at each line individually. This results in another 5% and takes about a month. I then do a Grammarly and Prowriting Aid pass. While each only takes a few hours, they address at least 5% of the changes.
I then print a copy for my beta read (my mother) followed by a cleanup edit. This is a big step and results in 5-10% of the changes. I estimate 30% of significant mistakes are caught at this stage. I then do the last pass, with Grammarly and Prowriting Aid.
When I am confident, I have my work reviewed by a professional editor, and then I check their changes. This represents 15-20% of the edited changes. I estimate this effort locates 40% of the major mistakes. I then send my work to a copy editor who checks each line for issues. I estimate this finds 10% of the problems and changes the document by 2%. After reviewing their work, I do a final Grammarly and Prowriting Aid pass, followed by a quick pass. This represents 0.5% of the changes, but it catches the last minor issues. Of course, I have to make one or more final-final pass because I am a control freak.
While writing, my changes add 15-20% to the length, and my beta read adds 1-2%. Each self-editing pass reduces the length by 1% because of condensed descriptions and eliminating useless sentences. The eventual result is at least 20% shorter than the first draft.
I still find self-editing fun because I get to relive the story and meet the characters again. Yet, this effort consumes a lot of time. However, I see the improvement after each pass, and that feels rewarding.
Is it worth it? I like to think practice makes perfect, and self-editing is the ultimate form of practice.

For the last eight months, I have been coordinating the edits on five work documents. They are basic upgrade instructions for a pre-installed assembly. While I am the lead author and wrote 80% of the document, many people have a hand in its content, format and approval. My epic journey to finish these documents has led to some interesting observations, which I thought it would be fun to share. Wait. Perhaps the word “fun” is not the best choice. Amusing? No. Painful? Perhaps. Therapeutic? Yup, that’s the word.
Group editing differs vastly from group creating. The effort lacks spirit and focus because each team member did not have a hand in the initial development. Participating editors desire to make the document their own, and the results lack pride.
People who contribute to a section protect that section. When they are asked to review the document, they lightly review their own work and pick apart the other sections.
Engineers do a lot of writing. One could categorize the result as dry, complex, terse, and explanation heavy.
The legal community has spread its bureaucratic tentacles everywhere. For example, I am forced to use the term “shall” and follow all the rules associated with that legal directive. Girrr. I hate that word.
Engineers like to spice up our documents wherever possible. I have come across Dilbert references, jokes, and silly sentences.
As a group, individuals have an innate desire to contribute. They cannot say, “This document is good enough.” This desire leads to endless revisions, awkward sections, strong opinions and hurt feelings. People are often unwilling to concede that their approach is not the best.
Group editing is not a team-building exercise. Because of all the compromises and mistakes, this activity forces people and groups apart.
Group editing over email is inefficient and introduces errors. The problem is that they do not synchronize the changes. Two people can work on the same sentence and come to different conclusions. Or five people can discover the same error. Another problem is that a mistake is corrected and then reintroduced from a prior copy. I often see changes unofficially made, unapproved, undone, discussed, re-approved, redone, and then re-discussed.
Change tracking helps, but it also can be an enormous obstacle. The problem is that it records a change, but it does not register the change's intent. This feature also forces the document to remain in the past. This is because the prior information is still present. I have witnessed many looping conversations over a good change.
An enormous problem with change tracking occurs when people view the edits rather than the final document. This practice introduces apparent errors, such as extra spaces. This editing method seems like an easy pitfall to avoid, but most people prefer to edit this way.
The more people involved in a group edit, the more inconsistency, and bad compromises are introduced. Good ideas are not appreciated, and strong opinions rule. The result is side negations, which get unpopular changes approved. Does this sound like an election?
For my particular document, after hundreds of hours spent on each document, the resulting changes affected less than 10% of the original content. This is because group editing rarely makes wide-sweeping changes. Instead, group edits result in small specific changes that are sometimes important. Of course, that was because my original document was excellent:)
The best approach to group editing across several departments occurs when three knowledgeable people work closely towards a clearly defined goal. Discussing/editing the document in a conference room with minimal external oversite saves a lot of heartaches. One person in the group needs to be the leader with ultimate authority. Hmm. What form of government does this remind us of?

Writers may encounter writer’s block, which occurs when an author cannot develop a new idea. While I occasionally encounter this issue, a bike ride provides the needed inspiration.
The problem I often encounter is editing block. This block occurs when I edit and find it too difficult to begin, or I do not want to continue. Sometimes the block occurs when I face a writing problem, and sometimes, I am not in the proper mindset. Yesterday, I realized that my character had made a huge decision, and I had not provided the motivation behind that decision. While I realized what was going on, readers are not telepathic. My frustration came out of the fact that I had not initially included this information.
I averted my frustration by editing something else for an hour and then added a paragraph. Today I reviewed this new paragraph and made a few changes.
When I am not in the mood to edit, I have learned the hard way not to force myself. My best approach is to relax for ten minutes and then try again. However, this solution contains a mental loophole because I often trick myself into an editing block so I can waste time. I am aware of this mental fight and try to recognize it. Sometimes, it takes a few restarts to get into the groove, and other times, I spend the evening watching television.
In analyzing this issue, I determined that the primary source of frustrations results from confronting a problem I alone created. It is difficult to face one’s limitations and failures.
As an example, in my third book, I wrote a great paragraph about technical achievement. My editor pointed out that this well-written section brings the exciting action to a painful standstill. The solution is obvious: delete or move the paragraph. My hesitation comes from the fact that I liked my original creation in the order that I wrote it. After a two-day distraction, I cut the paragraph. While a painful choice, I must admit that the book reads better. On a side note, a good outline would have identified this issue beforehand.
Editing blocks also occur when I come across an awful sentence or big mistake. I want to yell at myself, “You wrote this junk?” Looking into the mirror can be difficult, and big mistakes are always demotivating.
Are there any aids to help the editing process? There have been tremendous improvements in grammar, style, and spelling tools. Plus, there are excellent online examples, articles, help groups, and guides. Reading often also hones my skills.
Like any problem, the first step is recognition and then applying the solution. I am sure truck drivers have roads they dislike to travel, and teachers have subjects they wish to avoid. Editing is part of writing, and it improves with practice. Editing block is part of the process, and I now understand how to realize and overcome this limitation. Practice makes perfect, and this blog is an excellent example of a new document that requires editing.
Is blogging my editing therapy? Hmm. Something to think about.

I now understand editing is a left-brain artistic process and not a technical one. The fundamental difference is the attitude that one enters the process with. Editing requires a zen atmosphere, which comes from a relaxed mind. On the other hand, the actual editing (typing, grammar, story logic, flow, and spelling) is a technical right-brain activity.
What does editing feel like? The answer is nothing. Good editing requires blank emotions. If I am angry, upset, preoccupied, tired, hungry, bored, or frustrated, then things go wrong right from the start. So, I have learned that if I sense any hesitation, I immediately stop. Otherwise, it takes an enormous amount of effort to undo the damage. I find editing to be enjoyable, relaxing, and fun. It is like I am running on automatic and have become a crazy passenger watching the story from 30,000 feet.
When I edit, I have a specific goal which is a right-brain beginning. For example, locating errors or attacking dialog. However, I sometimes edit for fun. Or is this security? By security, I mean maintaining a “warm fuzzy” feeling that the document is ready for others to read.
During the process, words absently enter my mind. Once processed, the words are corrected if needed. That's it. There is no excitement, joy, anger, or reaction. I am like The Terminator. Well, this is not entirely true. I get upset when I discover a big mistake, and I get excited about the plot. However, these positive and negative feelings have decreased over the years.
While editing, I continue until I notice I am no longer in the blank mindset. Sometimes this occurs when I uncover a significant issue. 30% of the time, I can switch to a different document, and the blank slate returns.
What is the difference between editing and writing? When I write, the feeling is adventurous, engaging, forward-thinking, and focused. My mindset is 20% on the last sentence, 30% on the topic, 10% on the following sentence, and 40% on the present sentence. Grammar, spelling, sentence structure, story, plot, and other super important aspects are on autopilot. The zen slate is also not present. Writing is an active and engaging process that requires right-brain activity. Yet my stories are all left brain, idealistic, and thought-provoking. Hmm. Something to think about.
What about professional editors? I do not know how they work their magic. If somebody forced me to be an editor, I would be terrible. Granted, I occasionally edit other people's work.
I still find editing enjoyable, but I cannot always get in the mood. I am lucky that at the moment, I have many documents to work with. Yet, I see the same mistakes repeated. Hmm. Something to blog about.