Welcome to July! Our year of blogging about writing is half over. So I’d like to hear from you — what have you learned about your own writing? About how to improve your first draft? About what slows you down and keeps you from finishing that first draft? Have you learned anything about your perfectionism? Have you found your First Reader?
Or maybe you took away some tips on how to talk with a journal or book editor, so that your writing project moves forward in a timely manner.
Whatever it was…please share in the comments.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about institutional or individual consulting, dissertation editing, or coaching about writing.
I’ve been talking about “What Do Editors Mean When They Say….” This week let’s focus on more detailed comments they could make about your manuscript and how you might want to react. The editor’s comments will be in italics.
I think if you moved X and Y around, that the reader would be more likely to follow your meaning. This is fairly straightforward—or so it can seem. The editor is strongly urging you to reconstruct how you are telling the story of your research. It might be as simple as moving the section on ethical concerns to after the methods section, instead of before it, because knowing what you did will help the reader to “see” possible ethics concerns. It could be something more substantial, like the order in which you shared your results with readers. Often there is a logic to the data—one result flows from another—but authors sometimes are so involved in their research that they find it hard to see how changing the order could make things easier on the readers. For example, in the social sciences, the first tables usually convey the demographics of the sample. To have those at the end of the results section would feel unsettled. So expect that an editor might ask you to reorder the results section.
Even in the most quantitative of manuscripts, you—the author—are telling a story. While we all like a good plot twist, most stories–especially those which are shared in an academic journal– unfold in a relatively predictable manner. Each journal has a pattern that the typical story is told—you can find it by reading several published articles. Fitting your story into the journal’s pattern, will absolutely increase your chance of publication.
But…what if you don’t agree with the editor’s suggestion about reordering the manuscript? If this is the case, you will need to try persuading the editor. Make a strong case—focusing on how your way will be beneficial for readers who are trying to understand your story. I suggest doing it in a timely letter to the editor, laying out your argument in calm, measured language. But recognize that there is always is a risk that the editor might decide to rescind an offer to publish, if you and the editor are far apart on a major issue.
The editor wants what I consider to be picky grammar or style changes. Do I have to do those, too? I get it, I do. I was surprised at how many authors swore to me that their manuscript followed the American Sociological Style (used by the journal I edited) and it wasn’t even close to the style. So here I will side with the editor. She or he knows the style likely better than you do, so I would make these changes—especially if they are in the references or in-text citations.
Also I hope that you have learned your “grammatical trip wires.” I know mine (‘that’ versus ‘which’) and I will always listen when someone tells me that I have them backwards. Can you welcome another set of “grammar eyes” on your manuscript? Try to, it can really help to make your thoughts clearer and more precise.
I realize that some authors will listen to the editor about grammar issues but fight the copyeditor. I never have understood why; it felt to me a bit like a status issue (editor higher status/copy editor lower status) but that’s just a guess.
Again, if you feel strongly about something, say so. But what is very important is how you frame your feelings and words. Don’t berate, don’t do the equivalent of shouting, etc. State your issue calmly and rationally. Build an argument for why you feel the text should remain the same—you want them to listen and consider your request, after all. If you don’t, expect the editor and especially the copy editor, to make the changes as they see fit.
Listen to what the editor doesn’t say just as much as what the editor does. What do I mean? If I somewhat disagreed with “Reviewer 2”, I would just not discuss his or her comments in my letter to the author. However, if I disagreed vehemently (as in, I didn’t want the author to listen to that Reviewer) then I would say so in my letter. So read into the silences just as much as the words. Why do editors do this? My journal required that all reviewers get copies not just of the other reviews, but also my decision letters. That meant that reviewers could see my thoughts on their comments and I also wrote some personally if I felt that their comments were beyond the pale. I made the decision not to use those few reviewers ever again as well.
I know that it can be hard to “let a manuscript go” into the hands of editors, reviewers, copy editors, and eventually, readers. I have been there—I have trouble sometimes even having my husband read my words! In fact, we cannot be in the same room when he line edits for me—I’ll want to know what word he wants to change, etc. Talk with, write to your editor if you have questions. But I believe that most editors really want to have each manuscript tell its story in the best way possible and want you to succeed.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about institutional or individual consulting, dissertation editing or coaching about writing.
While editors will have their preferred ways of editing, here are some things you might expect and some questions you might want to ask before entering into a contract with one.
Cost
For most editors, this is a difficult topic, especially if they work with graduate students who might have been hit hard financially during COVID. Some have a per page cost for “simple” and “complex” editing. Others will have a “per hour” cost instead, no matter how many pages were edited during that hour. Some will have different costs for doing stylistic tasks (formatting for a dissertation, for example) or for proofing references.
Good editors will want to ask you questions about your writing style, your manuscript (i.e., is this a first draft, a final polishing), comments from reviewers or your dissertation chair and reviewers about your writing. If you are seeking writing help as well as editing, they might ask about what I call, your writing rituals (i.e., how do you start to write every day, how well does that ritual actually get you into writing v. procrastination or editing, and so on). A good editor will often ask you a series of questions before estimating a cost for the project:
-Number of pages?
-Amount of references and style they need to be in?
-Do you want the editor to proof references against text and visa versa?
-Do you want stylistic/formatting changes made too?
-The editor will likely ask to see a sample chapter to understand how technical the topic and vocabulary are, how complex your writing style is, etc. That will help the editor to estimate time needed (if payment is per hour).
-The editor likely will send you an estimate (often in an email) or a contract. Whichever is sent, it should summarize any conversations you have had about cost, time to completion, and how it will be edited.
What Is the Editor’s Queue?
Some editors are booked for several weeks and you are entering their work queue. Does that fit with your time schedule? They might discuss their queue on their website (I do) but others don’t. On my website I give 14 days for returning most jobs, but in reality, I finish even dissertations in about 5 or fewer days. But there have been a few times where I have to finish one dissertation before starting another, etc. Again, I am a part-time editor where many others are full-time and so their queue will be busier. Personally I’m not a fan of paying to “jump the queue” but ask the editor if you feel you need to do that, okay?
How Does The Editor Actually Edit?
I strongly suggest requesting a digital meeting with prospective editors, primarily to get the answer to this question. This meeting ought to be free, in my opinion. Editors have their own styles and you need to be sure that the style of the one you hire meshes with your needs. Let’s talk about about how there can be mismatches.
I once had a client who did not want to see any of the edits that I made; the client just wanted me to make them. That made me very uncomfortable. In part, having my work be visible is part of how I demonstrate to the client why I billed what I did. We just weren’t a good fit and I encouraged the client to find a different editor.
I’m a “show your work” editor. For simple spelling and grammar edits, I will make the edit in the text, but do it in blue font. For more elaborate edits (for example, changing the order of a sentence or paragraph), I will also use blue font for the new textual version and use strikethrough for what I am suggesting should be removed. For comments to my client, such as “I’m only 1 reader, but I got very lost here — could you rewrite this?” or “This was very confusing. I’m lost but here’s my attempt at making sense: ….” I will use the “insert comment” function.
During our digital meeting I will pull up (anonymously) another client’s manuscript, edited, so that I can show all the ways that I edit to my prospective client. I think that is an important part of that meeting.
I have had a few clients reply to these comments with new text and then pay me to insert it into the text versus doing that themselves. I offer to coach them (for free, of course) how to do this themselves (I am very aware of my client’s finances) but for some, their time is more precious than their money.
Other editors will only use “insert comments” and never change the original text their client sent. Would that bother you? You would have to take time to go through line by line and add any changes they had suggested. You–the client–need to find one who fits with your way of writing.
Do You Want Communication While the Editor Is Working?And If So, To What Email Address?
I confess; I am in contact with my clients a fair amount as I work. If I find a re-occurring concern (for example, someone was talking about their survey of parents and about 60% of the time used “ages 0-12” and 40% used “ages 0-13” for classification of their children. As a sociologist, not having consistent categories worried me and I finally wrote the client. She was grateful; she told me to change all “0-13” to “0-12” in the entire document. This was something her chair had mentioned repeatedly but she’d forgotten to handle. Other emails are a “one and done” type–“Is your committee okay with ‘they’ representing a singular or plural noun”? I also send a 9 p.m. email to my client which summarizes what I have done that day and what I still have to do. For some possible clients, this amount of communication might be too much. I always share my communication style with prospective clients during our digital meeting so that they can have that information as they are making their decision.
If you think you need a professional editor, I hope that you are successful in your search for one. And I further hope that this post gives you ideas of what to ask prospective editors as you conduct your search. Good luck with bringing your writing project to fruition.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about institutional or individual consulting, dissertation editing, or coaching about writing.
I’ve been on both sides of the author-editor relationship. I was an editor of the American Sociological Association’s sole pedagogical journal, Teaching Sociology, from 2010-2014. In those five years, I wrote over hundreds of decision letters; I struggled with each one. How to encourage realistically some, let others down gently but honestly, and celebrate with those who were to be published. And while I have had many articles and several books published, I have also felt the sting of what I felt were unfair editorial decisions. I’ve had my share of “Reviewer 2’s” inappropriate or off-topic comments. I want to answer some questions I was frequently asked as an editor.
What are the reasons that an editor might reject a manuscript without review? (Sometimes called a “desk reject”)
Probably the most common reason is that the manuscript was not a good fit for the journal and its mission. So for example, the journal I edited was a pedagogically-focused journal about sociology. But I sometimes received a manuscript which didn’t fit that mission. For example, a manuscript might be submitted and it is on how the interactions between a school principal and the school district’s central office shaped the budgeting process for an elementary school. Interesting, but I rejected that manuscript without sending it out to reviewers, because it was not enough about pedagogy. I would though, give the author the names of a few journals to which it was a better fit (in this case, the ASA journal, Sociology of Education). Other times the manuscript was pedagogical in nature, but was about teaching, for example, the introduction to political science college course, and not about teaching sociology. Again, I would instantly reject it but suggest that discipline’s pedagogical journal (if there was one).
Can I ignore some comments either made by the editor or a reviewer?
Of course you can, but …. think through the critique carefully before you choose to ignore it. If several reviewers are saying the same comment—I don’t think you should ignore it. And if you do, don’t pretend the comment wasn’t stated repeatedly when you go to write the cover letter for your revised manuscript to the editor and reviewers. You will need to explain why you chose to ignore the comment. Would it have changed the point of the manuscript in ways you disagreed with? How so? Would a suggestion to use a different theoretical framework have required too much new literature? Or perhaps would it have required more data collection? And why would that not be a good thing? Tell them why you made the choice to ignore their comment.
Can I begin a revision and send it to you, the editor, for your comments and thoughts, outside of the online submission system?
Ask the editor about this in an email before you do it. Editors of top journals, who receive hundreds of submissions a month, will likely say ‘No.” But other journals might have a more developmental approach to working with authors and might say “Yes” to doing this once in a while. If the editor says “Yes,” please don’t abuse her or his kindness by sending a new paragraph a day. Work hard to revise the most complex part of the manuscript, based on the editor’s and reviewers’ comments and send it once for consideration. Be sure to thank the editor when you receive feedback.
Is it okay to call an editor about a decision letter and/or comments?
Sure it is. But do it when you are calm and/or have the emotional wave that can hit an author reading a decision letter the first time, under control. Don’t call when you are angry. Know what you want to talk about. What do I mean? You want to be able to speak like this with the editor, “Your comment about weaving theory throughout the lit review section confused me, could you say more?” and not talk like this: “I think your decision is wrong and crazy and you need to change it this instant.” Usually, when an author called me and talked like that, the last statement had a few expletives added in for good measure. Remember two things about the editor: 1) You want to keep the editor thinking positively about your ability to edit the manuscript as requested so that it can be published, and 2) He or she is human, too, so try not to piss off the editor deliberately with your choice of words. Your goal for calling the editor should be to establish a good working relationship that gets your questions answered about how to revise the manuscript.
Do I have to follow the editor’s timetable for revisions?
Have to? No, but I strongly suggest that you do—especially if the manuscript received a “conditional accept” decision. Many editors tentatively slot conditionally accepted manuscripts into future editions which are already in process, so not returning it on time can impact production schedules.
If you know you cannot meet the deadline, contact the editor and propose a realistic new date. Once agreed to…be sure to meet that revised deadline.
The worst thing to do is to just “ghost” the editor. I had an author once call me, very upset by my editorial decision (which was a “conditional accept!”). The author eventually calmed down and realized that making the changes would strengthen the article. We agreed to a one month deadline for the revisions and I planned on making that the lead article for the edition which would be published in 6 months. But then I didn’t hear from the author (despite numerous emails and calls from me)…for almost two years. Then suddenly I received the revised manuscript in the mail. Trouble is, so much time had passed that it was now considered a brand new submission and had to go back through the entire review process. And I had an unhappy author, once again. Most journals have policies about how long a manuscript can be dormant before it must be treated as a new submission. So check the journal’s website or call and ask the editor. Another wrinkle in this can be that during the dormancy, there might be an editor change, which can sometimes shift the focus of the journal. So please, don’t ghost your editor!!
HELP! I’m going through the comments from the editor and the reviewers and they disagree. What am I supposed to do now?
While this can feel like an overwhelming problem, it actually is a pretty common one. Different people, with different backgrounds, construct different meanings to your text. Disagreements can give you a window into how future readers (if the manuscript gets published) might view your words and give you ideas about how to tighten up the manuscript.
When there are these conflicts, I suggest you read the editor’s letter very closely. If the editor mentions one reviewer’s comments and to consider using them in the next iteration of your manuscript—but not another reviewer who disagreed with the first reviewer—consider that your answer. The editor is pointing out how she prefers you to resolve the conflict. If you agree more with the “sidelined reviewer” and it concerns a substantive portion of the manuscript, then I would suggest you contact the editor about it. Again, do it when you are calm and have marshalled your arguments for why you believe the other reviewer’s comments would make the story embedded in your manuscript better.
The journal I edited had a policy that under nearly all circumstances, reviewers’ comments were to be shared with the author (but anonymously). A few of them I passed on, but I was so angry with the reviewer that I wrote them and said I would never use them again as a reviewer. So realize that sometimes the editor is in a tough spot–not liking the comments too. We might not be able to say it that bluntly if you call us, but listen between our words–we’ll likely let you know if that’s the issue. Okay?
One last piece of advice: editors need authors and their manuscripts. Editors need to move manuscripts to publication. They are not the enemy of authors, but they do function as gatekeepers…human ones who try to do their best for the journal and their academic discipline. So try to see their words as helpful tools to make your manuscript better. But if you feel an editor is acting unprofessionally—especially if you feel you are being discriminated against—contact the publisher of the journal. Again, do your best to explain the situation as you perceive it and see what processes there are in place for adjudication.
And one last heartfelt request: Offer to be a reviewer for the journals which publish articles which are meaningful to you, to your graduate and undergraduate students. Editors need people to review. Often part of long wait to hear back from an editor is the number of people who turn down editors’ request to review a manuscript. I once received my first “Yes send it to me” on the 28th person I contacted. So yes, it is unpaid labor and often not counted as much as it should in promotion and tenure decisions—but journals need reviewers too.
Have more questions? Write a comment and let’s keep talking!
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about institutional or individual consulting, dissertation editing or coaching about writing.
The focus of posts in June is working with a professional editor. So let’s talk about this.
Maybe you have a “revise and resubmit” where the journal editor recommends that you seek out an editor or perhaps it is your doctoral committee which says the same. What should you look for in an editor? What kinds of things should you be aware of? Let’s talk about the warning signals first.
WHAT TO BEWARE OF
You don’t need someone to write in your voice, because no one else truly can. You need someone to help you make your voice, your story, the best that it can be. So be cautious of editors who offer to rewrite completely (or write from scratch) your manuscript.
Look, I understand that some individuals who seek out professional editors want someone to rewrite/start over–they just want to pass a class or get their diploma. Instead, look for editors who want to create working relationship with you to bring out the best in what you have already created. Put differently, editors are not ghost writers –don’t expect them to be and be cautious if they offer to do so. The finished product should be expressing your voice, just better.
Editors are working professionals. Good ones will tell you what their estimated costs are up front and those that don’t are worth investigating more (e.g., during a first discussion or on their website). They should also tell you how they want to be paid (e.g., I started out using Zelle, but when I moved, my new bank did not accept those types of digital transfers, so I request personal or cashier’s checks). Pricing is something that editors often struggle with (page costs versus hourly costs or some combination), so look at several for what seems reasonable to you. Many editors have fixed costs (e.g., per page costs) and hourly costs (e.g., checking references for correct style and making edits), so the final invoice might not be exactly as estimated, but you should be able to see how the estimated costs were billed. If not–ask questions!
Most editors want to be paid as soon as they return the revised manuscript. However, during the pandemic that seemingly won’t end, I hope that many will also offer a way to work with clients who might be struggling financially (especially doctoral students). Do they talk about that? I wouldn’t use this as a “deal breaker” but it is something to consider as you look for an editor.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR
Will the editor meet with you to talk about your project, time frame, and needs as you either shop around or decide on the editor? I frequently schedule online meetings—often for 45 minutes—where we can see each other, talk more freely than over email or texting, and get a feel for if this relationship might work.
You want to find a professional editor who wants to find out about you and your writing, before launching into the process. So expect to answer some questions initially in order to help guide the editor’s work. For my doctoral clients, I have created a questionnaire I send them about the style choices their institution, their department, their program, and their committee members require or prefer. Is it APA 6th edition or 7th? Are there things that the committee members want which “bend” the style guidelines they say they want (I find many committees still want 2 spaces after a period, for example)? If the client is writing a dissertation, I’ll ask clients to help me to understand the tense of the chapters desired by the committee when we begin our work together. This can change as they move through the degree program—so before the prospectus is approved, the methods chapter might often be written in the future tense, but is changed once data have been gathered and analyzed. If clients don’t know the answers, I encourage them to find out from their chairs, so that we all are building to a final document which satisfies the client and the committee, both in style and in content.
Another part of the questionnaire asks them about their writing. What do they feel are their writing strengths? Their writing issues that I should be on the lookout for in their work? Have they had repeated comments about writing from their committee members? I ask them about how they write, when they write, and where they write.
I’ll ask if they have any writing rituals that help get them into and then keep them writing and any procrastination issues which can stop them cold. Sometimes this can be the same writing ritual! Their answers help me to understand the individuals I am in partnership with and help me to better assist them in succeeding at their writing tasks. Some clients go beyond hiring me simply as an editor and I become their coach—their answers about procrastination in particular help us to diagnose any issues they might be having. We’ll set writing goals, create accountability contracts with frequent writing check-in’s.
Will the editor send a summary of what you both are agreeing to, before beginning the editing? This allows for each side to one more time review the type of editing or bibliographical editing requested, the costs, the turn around time, etc.
Look for the editor’s turn-around time. It should be realistic and fit with your needs. If you need something done quickly, expect that the editor will have an expedited fee. If it is not listed on the website—ask!
Helpful editors will explain how they will work on your document. Does their way of editing make sense to you? You don’t want an editor’s work to slow you down in ways you were not prepared to handle.
For example, I edit in three ways: 1) minor grammar edits I just do, but I insert the new text in blue font and line through the error; 2) major edits I use the “insert comment” function in Word and explain what the grammatical issue is and offer a suggestion; and 3) sometimes I will state an opinion. I’m careful to phrase it this way: “I’m just one reader, but I got lost here—is there a different way to phrase this?” Usually this means that I am lost enough that I don’t feel I can offer a suggestion yet. I will show a prospective client how I have edited another client’s work (with permission and done anonymously) during our free online conversation.
They will have to make decisions about suggested wording I have made and decide to insert those with which they agree. This means that the client-writers have to take ownership — decide if they agree with edits, delete comments, etc. — they have to engage with their document again and in a way, with me through my comments. As I stated before, my clients cannot be passive; they are active partners as they work through the manuscript, making choices that reflect their voice and their ownership of the writing. They also will have to do a final “font color change” when they have completely gone through the document. I walk clients through how to do all of that, so that by their last chapter, they are quite comfortable with our joint process.
Would that editing method work for how you write and how you want to receive feedback from the editor? If it isn’t, then that person is probably not the best fit for you at this time. Would it also work for your timeframe?
The client-editor relationship has to be based on trust, so do research to find one who helps you to bring your writing project to completion, in the manner which best works for you.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about institutional or individual consulting, dissertation editing or coaching about writing.
The more I edit professionally, the more strongly I feel this. I hear every week from faculty clients and friends who say students are struggling even more these last few years with issues of style (as well as grammar). How can we rise up and effect this change that is so drastically needed?
When I was teaching, I found that helping students learn what was for many of them, their 3rd style–the American Sociological Style–was difficult. They struggled with details (when to use a comma and for which style) and often asked me an excellent question: “Why can’t there be just one style?”
Why indeed.
There is no (good) reason for so many styles–linked to professional associations such as the American Psychological Association’s best-known APA style, the Modern Language Association’s MLS style, my own discipline’s ASA style (American Sociological Association), and so on–to exist.
Then, to confound the situation further, many journals have constructed a mashup of several styles, often difficult to discern. I know that as a former editor I would have authors swear to me that they followed the ASA style meticulously–only I think they meant the APA one, because most of the manuscript was not written in the ASA format.
Let’s look at one journal article and how it should be cited in references. I’ll use one of my own articles. It’s hard to do indentations in WordPress, so I won’t, but understand that, for most of these styles, the 2nd line should be indented.
ASA Style, 6th edition
Lowney, Kathleen S. 1998. “Reducing ‘Theory Anxiety’ Through Puzzles.” Teaching Sociology 26(1):69-73.
APA Style (7th edition)
Lowney, K. S. 1998. Reducing ‘theory anxiety’ through puzzles. Teaching Sociology, 26(1), 69-73.
MLA Style
Lowney, Kathleen S. “Reducing ‘Theory Anxiety’ Through Puzzles.” Teaching Sociology, vol. 26, no. 1, 1998, pp. 69-73.
What is it about, for example, the journal’s volume number that must be italicized in APA, but not ASA, and in the MLA, needs the “vol.” before it for everyone to see? Or why is there a comma after the name of the journal in APA but not ASA?
And to make things even worse, trying to keep up with the editions of the same style can be disheartening. Looking at you, APA style. Why was it in the 6th edition that the DOI (digital object identifier) did not include “http” or “https” but then in the 7th edition, it is required? Wasn’t it understood at the time of the 6th edition that, if one wanted to allow for easy access to the permanent web address, the “http” or “https” would be needed? So why not include it?
Why have we academics accepted this nightmarish situation for so long?
On one hand, it seems that several of the most influential styles are using less and less information in citations (e.g., initials versus first names, eliminating the “pp.”), and so on. So why not create one and only one style? Perhaps the editors of the style manuals could fight the comma battle like on the combat robot show, BattleBots–two styles enter the box and one wins.
Now I realize that one (main) reason there are still several styles (at least for the APA and the MLA styles) is the amount of money they make for the association which has constructed it. The style manuals are for sale, then there’s the shorter manual helping you to understand the official manual, the laminated “cheat sheets,” the digital version of the manual, and don’t forget the software which offers to format your references in whatever style you would like (but are not always correct–so buyer beware!). Many individuals and presses make significant money off the multiple styles that currently exist and their ever-changing editions.* If there was one style–rarely if ever needing updating–it would be a financial blow to these industries.
Writing is hard enough, isn’t it? Do we really need to complicate it more (for academics and for our students) by continuing this multiplicity of styles? I say–it’s time to revolt and unify the academic world into one (ideally) style.
Who will join me?
*I want to acknowledge that as a professional editor, I also make money from this multiplicity of styles. Many clients ask for style editing as well as textual editing because they fear the stylistic wrath of the members of their doctoral committee. I would much rather have one easy-to-use style than the money.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about institutional or individual consulting, dissertation editing, or coaching about writing.
Are you like I used to be? I would start a writing project, with great optimism. I’d write the first sentence or if I was lucky, the first paragraph (yeah!!). Then I’d pause, read it, and scrap it. Before I began writing only on the computer, I would cover the floor with crumpled-up paper with what I’d call “starts.” For some reason, I couldn’t just cross out and start again, I’d need a new sheet of paper. [Yes, I know how wasteful this was and I do better now, I promise!] Some days my husband would come home to find my office floor covered in crumpled paper, to the point the carpet was invisible.
That first sentence, that first paragraph, had to be perfect. If it was, it somehow captured the whole (future) manuscript and all I had to do was find the time to sit down and write it out. But to get to that perfect, well, it took forever. And my early writing career was, to put it kindly, slow. Very. Slow.
Conversely, I feel like my last paragraphs are often my worst. And I know why. See what I (used to) do, is open up the document the next day and first read what I wrote the day before. I’d edit it, sometimes reordering paragraphs or tweaking the wording of sentences. Then, perhaps 30 minutes or an hour (or more!) into my writing session, I would move on to new writing. What this meant was…well, my beginnings were pretty good. They’d been edited every single day I wrote! But the ending, well, that might have only a week or so of revising time.
Trust me, while I told myself this was a good way to write, when what it actually was, was a good way to procrastinate from writing. Too much of my time was revising while editing instead of new writing– some days, revising was all I had time to do before my day was taken over with classes, grading, class preparation, and my marriage.
Finally, I realized I had to stop doing this. Okay, that is a bit too strongly worded–I had to do less of this. I haven’t quite broken the habit of editing first and writing second, but I have figured out some ways that work for me most of the time and I want to share them.
-So let’s say I am writing on a project, and it’s day 3 focusing on it. At the end of day 3, I will copy the last paragraph I just wrote into a new file which I call “Start here day 4.” That is the file I will call up on day 4, not the one I wrote on day 3. Don’t pull up the larger file!! Write notes if you feel you need to clarify something, move text around, etc. Day 5 will start with the last paragraph of day 4. Rinse and repeat. And I do that for a workweek (5 days). Then, during the weekend, I take about 15 minutes and compile the work into a new “in progress” file that has all the writing done. I’ll spend about another hour editing it, focusing in particular on the notes I had made during the week. This is the time where I’ll think about moving paragraphs around, inserting additional notes where I need to add citations or expand on the prose, and then I save it and start a new file for “day 6” with just the last paragraph. And so it goes.
-I backward design the manuscript by creating an ending/conclusion sections first. That gives me a bit of a destination to point to as I write the rest of the manuscript. Trust me–I usually hate it, but having an ending in sight can help guide some of the writing decisions. While I try to write an actual ending, if I can’t, I will create an outline of the key points. I’ll copy it to an electronic version of a “sticky note” which I keep on my 3rd monitor so that it is omnipresent as I write. Even if that’s not where you end up–you have an ending, there, before you on the screen as a destination. That can often be enough to keep going.
-I use a variation of the Pomodoro technique.* If I cannot resist looking backward at what I wrote the day before (or even earlier), I set a timer for 15 minutes and force myself to move on when it goes off. It allows me to indulge the “make it better by editing” side of myself, while still giving me time to advance my writing during that session.
-I am working hard on giving up “perfection” in my writing. It’s a daily struggle. I’ve said to myself and to my students over and over again that “writing is a process” but I fear, in my head, I didn’t always believe it. I thought it had to have a destination–and I had never found it. Given my lack of a sense of direction, I thought it was only me who felt this way. I felt guilty talking to others about writing goals when I struggled so intensely with my own writing. Now I know–most days–that the real goal is “words on the page, not in my head” and that where those words take me is both a process that sometimes surprises me but also will end in a destination. There will come time to write a final paragraph, the ultimate sentence. And it will be done.
-Another thing–crazy as it may sound–that has helped me to keep writing instead of endlessly editing, is to work on two manuscripts (or more) at once. It can be two research articles, two blog posts, or even different chapters in a monograph. Having the ability to shift between projects can sound overwhelming but it has sometimes “unstuck” me when I needed something drastic. Making progress on one manuscript could take my mind off feeling like I should be editing the other document.
If you are reading this and thinking –“she’s just playing mind games with herself”–I can understand. I say that to myself too on the bad days. But what I know is that these have helped me to write more, procrastinate less, and edit only when the manuscript is ready for that step. And that’s quite a few steps down the path to my destination.
So how about you, readers, how do you move your writing forward and stop yourself from editing too soon?
My year of blogging about writing is four months in. January we spoke about finding your writing persona; February about tools and writing locations that work for you; March was about beginning a new project or taking up a long-lost project; while April has been about finding inspiration when writing is difficult. Several people have left comments and far more have reached out privately to me with questions, concerns, and worries about writing projects. Let’s keep talking…….
The next four months will be about the editing process. May will focus on self-editing–the good, the bad. June will discuss working with a professional editor. July will talk about finding useful/good readers and commenters when you are ready for external feedback. And August will focus on responding to feedback, especially that dreaded Reviewer #2.
So stick with me and we begin to consider the best ways to edit your own work.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about dissertation editing or personal coaching about writing.
Have you ever sat down to write, and an hour, maybe two into it and you still have a blank page? Ah, come on, I know it’s not just me who has done this. I get flooded with feelings of guilt (“I’ve wasted good time”), frustration (“why can’t I manage my procrastination better?”), and self-loathing. And yet…the page (or screen) is still blank.
It is so hard–I feel that after a failed day of writing, that I should write even more the next day to make up for my failure. And guess what? The pressure is so intense that…it happens again. And so one bad day becomes two, and quickly can become two weeks, three weeks, a few months, and so on.
So how do I combat “blank-screen-itis?” Here’s how I try–and I emphasize try because I’m a writer-in-progress, not a “completed” writer.
–Writing something is far better than writing nothing. Have there been days when I wrote a grocery list? A to-do list? Yup. But those days are balanced by days where I outline a month’s blog posts or a book chapter or even a list of locations to check for new resources for a writing project and if I am really lucky, pages of a manuscript. Put differently, words out of your head and onto a notebook or a screen matter. They amount to forward progress, even if they amount to one tiny step forward.
–Writing something awful is far better than writing nothing at all. So never ever delete words! Keep them. Build on them. Revise them. Scream at them–whatever it takes to write the next few words, the next few sentences, and if you’re really lucky, the next few paragraphs.
–Sometimes I start writing in a very different style–a poem for example, about the subject of the manuscript. Trust me, I’m no poet, but it’s a different type of writing and trying it for a bit can get my creative juices flowing.
–Remind myself frequently that writing and editing are not the same thing. I still struggle with this, but I am better. I used to open a document and spend an hour or more editing what I’d already written. [The month of May will be devoted to self-editing–so stay tuned!] Then I might have only fifteen minutes to do new writing. Now I schedule both writing and editing into my weekly calendar and hold myself accountable to not mix those tasks.
–I stop in the middle of a sentence and draft a brief outline of what the next day’s writing could focus on (notice I said “could” and not “should” — I have found that I can sometimes fight against “orders” even if they are my own!).
These are my ways to get words out of my head–what are your ways to fight the blank page/blank screen problem? Let’s talk.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about dissertation editing or personal coaching about writing.
Many of my dissertation authoring-clients reach out to me for editing and coaching when they have hit a wall. You might know this wall; I sure do. It’s the “it’s okay now, but it has to be perfect” wall. I understand the sentiment; I have lived under its burden for many years. But the search for perfection–be it in our scholarly life or our personal life–is a search that postpones life and career instead of letting us enjoy them.
What do I mean? Wanting to write the perfect dissertation or the perfect monograph or to find the perfect partner and create a perfect life together or whatever else you find yourself striving to be perfect at–is a mental trap that can harm your projects, your partner, and yourself.
So I talk with my clients about finding the “sweet spot” between obtaining committee approval and being personally happy with the dissertation. I share that this “sweet spot” will likely be fleeting. Even if the committee is happy with the dissertation, that often they, as authors, might start to pick apart the document even before it is submitted. The voice of perfectionism could be “But if I rewrote this one section it would be better” or “I just saw a few new sources that I should probably cite” or a thousand other thoughts. I’ve found that the voice usually gets louder the closer the manuscript is to actually being done.
What I have found, is that perfectionism is my fear speaking, rather than my expertise, creativity, or originality. It could be my fear of what others might think, or the fear of being just categorically wrong about my analysis, or the fear of being embarrassed by not seeing an analytical error that others will see right away. Or…………the list could go on and on.
So I have to fight constantly against perfectionism and have found a few things that can work for me and have worked for my clients:
-Name the fear for what it is. It’s not perfectionism, but the fact that once I tweet out a column, even if I made a colossal error–I can’t get the tweet back. It’s on the Internet, forever. Or it’s that feeling of “what if no one buys the book once it is published?” It’s shame, or worry “about future embarrassment,” and so on. Naming whatever is behind your perfectionism can take away some of its power over you.
-Then I come up with a counterexample. “Even if I made a mistake, it won’t be as bad as….” Fill in the blank of whichever mathematical/scientific/analytical or spelling/grammar error you are aware of!
-Then I try to find one new thought in my manuscript –even if I made a mistake elsewhere, that would be an original contribution. This helps me to realize that not every word has to be “perfect” to still be academically useful.
-If none of those work, I try this: “Really, how many people are going to read this, anyway? Don’t be so full of yourself.” Honesty–brutal honesty–usually helps me to get over the fear and procrastination. It isn’t always easy, but it can work.
-If I have not already sent out the manuscript to a friend or colleague for comment, I might do that now. Even one person’s positive thoughts (who is not my husband/First Reader) can be enough to get me over this perfectionist “hump.” The danger with this tip–at least for me–is I could focus more on negative feedback than any positives they gave.
-Don’t laugh: another trick I try to deal with my procrastination about a manuscript, is to switch to one about which I feel even worse! That way, comparatively, the first one seems better, without even changing a word! Try it–it works! Try to have at least two manuscripts always in process. They could be different chapters of the dissertation or monograph or completely different writing projects.
-Another way that I can break through procrastination and that ‘cutting’ internal voice is to work on references. Pulling out the APA or ASA style manual and being sure that each citation is in the correct style is mind-numbing. But it quiets that inner voice (maybe it gets bored?) and keeps it away for quite a while. And that’s success. I can shift back to writing in a few hours and be creative again.
-I know others who name their inner critic as well as their inner cheerleader and they talk to them, helping them to understand the other “side” of you and your writing and learn how to control or manage each one.
-Journaling can be a similar way to meet your inner critic, take it seriously–to a point–and then to turn down its voice’s volume. If you journal with both your inner critic and inner cheerleader, you might try using two ink colors or font colors if you journal online. Notice which color/voice is getting more of your attention and work to creating more parity between them. Perhaps even in the beginning of a writing project, have much more cheerleader than critic, but as you shift into self-editing or listening to outside reviewers, the critic voice might have some useful ideas. Don’t always assume it’s working against you and your writing project. Sometimes it’s ideas are wonderful–but causing fear of failure.
So if you ever procrastinate, do you know why? Is it fear? If so, of what? How do you manage to work though it and make progress on your work? Let’s share ideas in the comments.
Please visit the Pedagogical Thoughts website to contact me about dissertation editing or faculty editing of manuscripts (final edits or developmental editing of your document) or coaching about writing.
What is it about, for example, the journal’s volume number that must be italicized in APA, but not ASA, and in the MLA, needs the “vol.” before it for everyone to see? Or why is there a comma after the name of the journal in APA but not ASA?
Pedagogical Thoughts 