Revising a Manuscript — Jenna Kernan

STRUCTURAL EDITS

I just finished my structural edits for my fifth thriller after receiving a TWELVE PAGE revision letter. When I get these letters, even though I know the intent is to make my story better, it still feels like a judgement of my ugly baby.

I know editing is an essential part of the writing process, a crucial step in refining the story. One problem with this story was giving away one of the major twists and hiding the other so effectively that, to a reader, it was less of a twist and more of a trick. The second major point was that my attempt to keep my protagonist’s secrets kept me from allowing the editor to get to know her. And finally, I had those ticklish happenings that didn’t make sense and led the editor to fall out of the story and think, ‘that would never happen’. That one is bad.

So, when faced with the overwhelming edits that need to be undertaken and knowing I have less than a month to do so, the project seemed overwhelming. What to do?

THE PROCESS

Here’s my process. Remember, everyone works differently and this process might not work well for you. There is no right way to revise. At least none I have stumbled across.

1. Read the editor’s letter.

After reading that twelve-page letter, I did what I always do. Complain to my husband about how stupid editors are and how they don’t understand anything and that it’s impossible to fix all the issues she mentioned, so why even try?

2. Re-read the editor’s letter.

The next day, after I have gotten my temper tantrum out of the way, I get to work. This involves rereading the letter. Highlighting and taking notes on the letter. Setting out the largest problems, and how to tackle them, then addressing the next biggest and so on. I read it again and begin writing my take on what needs to be done. Then I read all comments on the manuscript.

3. Tackle the biggest flaws first.

This is crazy hard because it involves cutting and rewriting and trying to keep things in order while knowing you are introducing so many new timeline errors and continuity errors and why did I even bother to spellcheck the draft before submitting it as about a third of those pages are now gone, anyway.

4. Begin Eating the Elephant.

You know that expression? It goes like this: How do you eat an elephant? Answer: one bite at a time. So, I take that first bite.

I delete a scene, or I write a new one and insert it. I highlight a section that is problematic, according to that stupid editor who is turning out to have, perhaps, made a valid point.

Each time I make a major change, I save the revisions. This comforts me, knowing I can go back to the old version. P.S. I very rarely do but might need to rescue a line or paragraph. So I might have MS1, MS2, MS3 versons of a manuscript, which denotes version 1 and so on. During this stage, I am convinced that I’ll never get this all back together and that I’ve cut something vital and that the new scenes aren’t blending in and that I don’t have enough time to complete the edits and, oh, what’s the point? Then I take another bite of the elephant.

I begin reviewing the overall plot, shuffling the order of scenes, ditching many, many scenes and creating new ones and realizing that stupid editor is actually pretty smart.

5. Re-read that structural letter again and my notes.

I read this letter a lot. I check off the things that I’ve managed to accomplish and decide if there are any that I don’t agree with. At this point, I realize that I really don’t disagree with them, but they are a lot of work, and I still resent this editor. But now I resent her because she is right about everything and why can’t I see these things myself while I’m writing the manuscript in the first place?

6. Tackle the lessor problems next.

Once I’ve made the big changes, I tackle the next hardest, still thinking that I don’t have time and I’m making everything worse and maybe I should ask them to extend the deadline.

7. Re-read the letter.

Here, when I re-read the letter, I realize four things. First, I have accomplished quite a lot. Second, the manuscript is much improved. Third, the stupid editor is looking more brilliant with each reading. Fourth, I still don’t have time to finish the rest of the suggestions. But I keep going because I have a contract and now, I’m curious just what this book could be with a lot more revising.

8. Finishing Up

Once I’ve made all the corrections, additions, deletions, and changes, I need to read through the manuscript and check things like my chapters, which now read: 2,4,3,7, *, * 10. You get the idea. They aren’t in sequence. Many new ones are added, and I need to clean that up. I checked overall things, and notice that chapter eight is twenty-nine pages long and the others are five pages. So, chapter eight becomes Chapter 8, 9 and 10.

9. Review & Letter

This stage means listening to my manuscript on the ReadAloud function and trying very hard not to fiddle with the sentence structure, as I don’t have the time. But I check for mistakes, grammatical or spelling, the wrong word or missing words and the tiny minutia that goes along with conveying meaning.

FINAL TOUCHES

I will also write a letter detailing the changes I’ve made and add anything I am worried about or that I know needs another check. This letter goes in with the manuscript to the exceptionally talented editor who will read the new version and hopefully send me a shorter letter for the next round of edits.

SUMMARY

Jenna Kernan with her gold medal book for popular fiction, The Ex-wives, in April 2023 at the Florida Book Awards

Editing is hard but rewarding work. At times the process is terrifying and, at others, I feel I have made a perfectly acceptable story into a confusing, disorganized jumble that looks like the tangled, twisted, knotted mess my iPhone headphone cords often become.

The revised manuscript is clearer, better, and more believable, thanks to my gifted editor’s willingness to deliver their honest opinion, point out problems and encouragement to do better.

Don’t you just hate it when she’s right?