Editing tips - Before you go

Many writers – beginners and published – overuse the word ‘before’.

Storytelling or narrative should flow with ease and contain its own internal logic. People act and react. Conflict begs for a response, depending on the characters involved. The sequence of actions should be logical, too.

An example:
He closed the window before he left.
That’s okay, I suppose. Though why it couldn’t have been written as:
He closed the window and then left.

Another example:
Before he opened the drawer, he smiled.
That’s illogical in the chronological sense. Often we don’t see the character then opening the drawer – it’s just open. Better to write:
He smiled and then opened the drawer.
Logical sequence restored. Otherwise, we’re being told about an action out of sequence. The revised version shows us the actions in the logical order.

Another:
The large woman picked up a rag before reaching for the kettle. “Take the children back to their ward,” she said. “They still may have time to have their evening meal before they go to bed. See to it they have their uniforms returned and store their clothing.”
“Yes, sir.” She curtsied before reaching toward the children.

Maybe: The large woman picked up a rag, which she used on the handle to lift the kettle...
‘Before they go to bed’ is fine.
She curtsied and then reached toward the children.

So, before you dive in and use that word, think before you type!

Editing tips - Every which way

Ups and downs of writing action can’t be overstated. Sometimes, the writer overwrites and overuses words without realizing it.

Here’s an example from an early draft ms I received.
Taking his chances, Rick slipped upwards around a steep pathway of rugged rocks. It was a close call as shot after shot split the air near to his body. The pressure only relieving when he heard the heavy sound of John’s Sharps taking up the action from below. Shots echoed up the hillside as John, recovered now, picked his favoured spots and blasted the crest of the hilltop where he guessed the sharpshooter hid. He left the way clear for Rick to rise and clamber up over the edge of the hilltop.

Exciting, but it needed a little work.
Taking his chances, Rick slipped around a steep pathway of rugged rocks. Shot after shot split the air close by. The pressure only lessened when he heard the heavy sound of John’s Sharps taking up the action. Shots echoed as John, obviously recovered now, picked his favoured spots and blasted the crest of the hilltop. That left the way clear for Rick to rise and clamber up over the crest of the hill.

So what did I change?
I removed: upwards, It was a close call, near to his body, relieving, up the hillside, where he guessed the sharpshooter hid. The latter removed because it’s making an assumption about what John was thinking and slows down the action. There may be countless ways the passage could be rewritten to improve it further, but the editor isn’t in the business of rewriting, just improving the narrative flow and identifying errors of spelling, word usage and internal story logic.

Here’s another excerpt:
Rick staggered. He heard the loud screech of complaining timber over the sounds from below and he felt the gantry shift as aged support ropes beneath him snapped. The barrow that held him began to slide dangerously as the platform tilted. He struggled to clamber over the sides, but the steep angle of descent made it difficult. It appeared that Rick was heading for a messy death among the remains of the mining sheds far below.

Again, a good action set piece.
Rick staggered. He heard the loud screech of complaining timber over the sounds of the gunfight and he felt the gantry shift as aged support ropes snapped. The barrow that held him began to slide dangerously as the platform tilted. He struggled to clamber over the sides, but the steep angle of descent made it difficult. He was heading for a messy death among the remains of the mining sheds far below.

Here we had over, below, beneath, tilted, over, steep, descent, below… Too many directions. By simply getting rid of a couple, it’s a little less haywire, I felt. Note I also removed ‘It appeared that’ which tends to jump out of Rick’s POV.

Editing tips - With one mighty leap

Usually, our fictional characters don’t possess super powers. They can’t see through walls, for example.

In this example from one ms, we’re in the POV of the main male character, Jack.

He said, ‘We’d better be going.’
Jane excused herself so she could get dressed. Back in her room she flung open every drawer in the dresser, wondering what brought Jack to their unit. Tops went flying until the floor disappeared under the mass. She reappeared, looking a picture of wide-eyed innocence, in a simple jogging suit.

So not only do Jack's eyes follow Jane through the walls, he gets into her head too. An abrupt and totally unnecessary POV shift. I’ve seen this time and again – and it’s probably the movies that are to blame. The viewer shifts wherever the director decides to go, and rarely settles on a main character viewpoint. Visualise, yes – but make it sensible and realistic.
The offending words were excised at the editing stage, thus:

He said, ‘We’d better be going.’
‘I won’t be long, I’ll just get dressed,’ Jane said and rushed into her bedroom. Minutes later, she reappeared, looking a picture of wide-eyed innocence, in a simple jogging suit.

I replaced the ‘tell’ with Jane’s actual speech. Also, Jack – and the reader – can see her moving to her bedroom now.

Editing tips - Phony

The telephone conversation is another potential pitfall for the unaware writer. It can come across as phony – pun intended, but you probably guessed that.

Here’s an example. Several contemporary mss I receive might replicate this.

Brent listened, unimpressed as Joe tried to bullshit him again with computer jargon. ‘I don’t give a shit about any of that! I want it taken off the net…’ he demanded.

‘What do you mean it’s not that easy?’ Brent incredulously asked. He sighed and Joe started again.

And so on…

This scene is from Brent’s POV. So why doesn’t Brent – and the reader – hear Joe speaking on the other end of the phone?

Writers watch TV and movies and see only one side of a phone conversation (unless the director uses a split screen technique) so they jump in and do the same. The difference is, the story on the screen isn’t from the character’s POV. The viewer isn’t in the character’s head. On the page, the reader’s in the character’s head until such time as the POV changes.

If Joe had a few lines of speech, it would be a little more credible. Brent could have encapsulated the rest in his narrative head. Such as, ‘Hey, Brent, it isn’t that easy,’ Joe whined. Then Brent makes his outburst. Getting Brent to repeat the words the reader doesn’t hear is for the stage, not the book. Instead, Joe should have said those words.

Just a hang up of mine, I guess.

Editing tips - Clause for confusion

I’ve come across this kind of mistake a few times in submitted mss and even in published books.

Again, an appropriate example from Broken Silence:

‘Gibbs had once been a heavy-weight boxer; successful in his time… Since retiring from the ring, Madley had decided to keep him as a pet; a fierce, snarling, slathering Rottweiler at that, all bite and no bark.’

Good phrase to end with. It’s a pity that the sense is confusing, though, as the two clauses actually relate to different people. What the second sentence suggests is that Madley retired from the ring, which isn’t the case at all. It should have read, ‘Since Gibbs retired from the ring, Madley had decided to keep him as a pet…’

So, make sure the words you use mean what you intend them to mean.