The Perfect Write: An Impossible Dream?

It goes without saying that an edited piece of writing has a better chance of getting the golden nod from a publisher or a ‘gatekeeper’ (read literary agent) than writing that hasn’t been comprehensively edited. It’s also a fact that the more rounds of editing a work endures, the more refined it gets.

Which brings us to the question: how much is enough? It needs asking because self-editing is thirsty work, and unless you place a limit on the number of rounds you’re willing to put your writing through, you run the risk of drying up before your next opus – or becoming paralysed with paranoia.

I’d place a cap on six rounds, each focused on achieving a particular objective. Please note that all the rounds mentioned below relate to a work of fiction after its first draft has been written.

ROUND ONE: Be your own critic    

Put the first draft away and start on another project. Read your draft after a week, but don’t concern yourself with grammar or punctuation. Instead, focus on the big picture. Are there lengthy narrative sections (including backstory) that slow down pace? Are there inconsistencies and errors of logic? Stilted dialogue? Inadequately explored interior monologue? Too much ‘telling’ and not enough ‘showing’?  

Circle out the areas that need a rewrite, and… rewrite.

ROUND TWO: Enlist a beta reader

After you’ve polished your second draft to the best of your abilities, send it to a couple of beta readers for an opinion. Usually, these are writers who understand the demands of fiction and have an above-average grasp of English grammar and style requirements. They offer free services to writers and seek similar services in return, and they can be contacted individually or at a site (more of this in another post).

Limit yourself to just a few beta readers and stick with them. This will give them a chance to understand your ‘voice’ and fiction preference (literary or genre) and provide relevant feedback. While giving your beta readers carte blanche to dig out all the bugs in your work, it would help to mention areas you want focused on. For example, if you’re prone to overwriting, draw your beta reader’s attention to this weakness. If you have trouble with syntax, mention it. If you’re into crime fiction, ask whether you’ve met the criteria that applies to the genre.  

Beta readers are fresh eyes that will see errors you’ve missed. They will help you write a better third draft – and they’re free.

ROUND THREE: Get to third base

Rewrite your manuscript, keeping the feedback from beta readers in mind (if you think the feedback is useful) and paying attention to grammar and punctuation – assuming, of course, that you’re in the higher percentile in this regard!

ROUND FOUR: Use software support

After you’re done with your third draft, run it through editing programs like ProWriting Aid, Stylewriter, SmartEdit, Ginger, Microsoft Word  and the like (more of this in another post). These programs will tag problem areas in your text that you and your beta readers would have missed: word and phrase repetition, tautology, passive voice, clumsy syntax, parallelism and diction issues, clichés, and so on. Make changes as you go along.

ROUND FIVE: Read… and rewrite

Find a quiet, private place and read your text aloud. The lines should flow smoothly and logically. If they don’t, iron out the wrinkles. This is called line editing and follows the substantive editing process explained earlier.

ROUND SIX: Proofread, proofread, proofread

The crosshead is self-explanatory. You need to check each word for spelling errors. Check punctuation. Check for consistency. If it’s British English you’ve decided to use, make sure you don’t slip into US English in Chapter Ten. Ensure consistency in style. If you’re writing for American audiences, use the Chicago Manual of Style as a guide. If your readers are primarily British, use the Oxford Manual. If the audience is all and sundry, I’d suggest sticking to British English.

Take a long, long break (two weeks?) and then read your manuscript once more.

Make final changes.

Then send it out… and cross your fingers.

The Interpreter of Maladies

Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Interpreter of Maladies is a collection of shorts that won a Pulitzer in 2000. These focus on Indians – especially Indian Americans – confronting the complexities of close relationships and the problems of adapting to a socio-cultural environment quite different from India’s.

In ‘This Blessed House’, the author explores the subtle conflict between Sanjeev and his wife Twinkle over the religious items left behind by the previous Christian owners of a house they’ve bought. Sanjeev, ever-consciousness of his Hinduness, is not as accepting of the Christian West as his wife is.

In ‘The Interpreter of Maladies’, tour guide Kapasi studies a US-based Indian couple and their children through the prism of his cultural upbringing and becomes judgemental, even as he fantasizes a romantic liaison with the wife.

‘A Real Durwan’ and ‘The Treatment of Bibi Haldar’ look at Indian women trapped in a rural world defined by casteism, ignorance, superstition, and poverty. These stories are the oddballs in this collection, to the extent that they do not focus on Indian Americans as do the stories mentioned earlier, and others like ‘Mrs Sen’s’ and ‘The Third and Final Continent’.

  

Lahiri’s writing is simple and straightforward, so readers expecting poetic fugues or linguistic pyrotechnics will be disappointed. Similarly, those looking for Archer-style twists in the tale are advised to give this collection a wide berth. The literary minded, however, will definitely appreciate Lahiri’s ability to craft well-defined characters within the constraints of the short story form and use everyday situations to spin tales that are intellectually satisfying.

It is posited that The Interpreter of Maladies has been conceived as a short story cycle, where motifs and symbolism are used to fuse stories into an organic whole, to provide a nuanced yet incisive commentary on the immigrant experience.