The Most Dangerous Myth about Writing

July 11, 2017 | 6 min read

 


Today’s guest post is by editor and author Susan DeFreitas (@manzanitafire), whose debut novel, Hot Season, won the 2017 Gold IPPY Award for Best Fiction of the Mountain-West.


 

 

Based on the encounters I’ve had as an author and an editor, I’d say it’s rarer to find someone who doesn’t want to write a book than someone who does.

Many dreamers never so much as start. But there are also a whole lot of would-be authors who start writing a book and never find a way to finish it.

Some writers lose the thread of a novel because they lack a sense of the big-picture, the story as a whole.

Some abandon their writing projects because they lack the discipline to set aside time to write.

But there are many writers who fail not because they’re not cut out for writing, but because they are, in as much that they’re perfectionists. But that perfectionism has been misplaced.

Which is why I consider the idea that you should revise while you’re drafting a book the most dangerous myth about writing.

The Great (Unwritten) American Novel

In 2000, the ink on my degree in creative writing was not yet dry, but I was working on the Great American Novel.

For me, at twenty-two, this involved working in a bagel shop and spending a lot of time in Coyote Joe’s, my local watering hole—but despite my youthful excesses, I worked steadily at the novel I had in mind.

Sure, it was a sprawling epic—and sure, my reach exceeded my grasp (by a mile, at least!). But the book didn’t fail because I lacked vision, nor did it fail because I stopped writing—in fact, I worked diligently on it for the next ten years of my life.

That novel failed because every time something seemed off, I went back to the beginning and revised.

The Power of Deadlines

There is a perennial truth known to grad students and journalists: a looming deadline will make you actually finish a piece of writing, no matter how epic or ambitious your aims with it might be.

When I went back to school at thirty-two, I no longer had the luxury of revising ad infinitum, because I had to turn out twenty pages of new work every two weeks.

And yet, these were somewhat famous people I was working with, who might just give me a hand up if they liked my work. The incentive to produce polished prose was high.

But how could I produce polished work in just two weeks?

My solution was simple: I worked twelve-hour days. I hadn’t kicked my perfectionist’s habit of revising as I drafted, I’d just found a way to accommodate it (by eliminating nearly everything else of any consequence from my life).

As a result, I did produce some polished work (though I’d scrap a whole lot of it later; see Editor’s Note, below). And maybe, just maybe, I managed to impress someone—if not with my work, than my work ethic.

But what I lost, in the process, was my enjoyment in writing itself.

Remember When Writing Was Fun?

When I was a kid, I didn’t dread the act of writing. Between the pages of my composition notebooks, fantasy worlds came alive and “imaginary friends” became real. I was always looking for an excuse to play hooky from the rest of my life (especially if it involved homework or chores).

After grad school, I asked myself, “When did writing become something I hate?”

I realized this change occurred when I tried to perfect a piece of writing, to finish it, in too short a span of time. But that short span of time—the almighty deadline—was what had finally allowed me to finish in the first place.

How could I make writing fun again, while actually producing publishable work?

For me, the answer was this: Stop revising as you write. Separate drafting from revising. And reconsider your tools.

Part One: Stop Revising as You Write

Remember my Great (Unwritten) American Novel? It’s languishing in the back of my hard drive because I could not stop going back to the beginning and revising it. Which, though it gave me the illusion of progress, kept me from doing anything more than inching forward.

It can be useful now and then to look back at where you’ve been with your novel and the promises you’ve made to your reader—useful too to remember what the voice of the protagonist or narrator sounds like.

But take it from someone who sacrificed years of her life in the service of a failed manuscript: that boomerang that keeps sending you back to the beginning is unlikely to ever give you enough momentum to write your way through to the end.

And oftentimes it’s only once you’ve reached the end of your book that you know—really know—the way that it should begin. So no matter how polished your opening pages might be, you might have to scrap them in the end.

Part Two: Separate Drafting from Revising

When I talk about drafting, I’m talking about the process of creating new work. By revising, I’m talking about the process of improving that work—adding to it and deleting from it, reshaping and improving it.

Productivity experts tell us that we’re less efficient when we’re constantly switching between tasks, and it doesn’t take a neuroscientist to tell you that drafting and revising make use of very different parts of the brain. (The former generally involves throwing spaghetti at the wall; the latter involves deciding what sticks.)

As a consequence, switching back and forth between these two tasks in the same session tends to be not only inefficient but frustrating—and because it’s hard to do both tasks well, you never quite achieve the effortless state of flow.

That’s another term productivity gurus like to throw around. But writers, you know what I’m talking about: The flow state in drafting is when the next word, the next sentence, the next movement of the story, is clear; the flow state in revising is when you can easily tell what’s on and what’s off (and how to address the latter).

If you want to work efficiently—and with less frustration—my advice is to separate these two tasks as much as humanly possible.

Part Three: Reconsider Your Tools

When I decided I was going to make writing fun again, I tried all sorts of process-oriented hacks. Some of them stuck, and some of them didn’t, but one of the most useful strategies I found was drafting by hand.

When you open up a Word document, the first thing you see is the beginning of the piece. If you’re a perfectionist—and to succeed at writing, I believe, you must be—it’s difficult not to get sucked in. (What’s a little nip and tuck here and there?)

The trusty composition notebook from my childhood, I found, did not work that way. I opened to the last thing I had written, not the first—and in doing so, more effortlessly found the thread (especially if I had made a few notes the last time I wrote, about what came next).

Of course, writing by hand is slower than writing on a computer. So if you can find a way to write—via a typewriter, via tech like the Freewrite, or simply via the willpower required to start at the end of your Word document, rather than the beginning—you’ll have the best of both worlds.

Editor’s Note

Everything I’ve learned in the course of my journey as a writer has been backed up by what I’ve learned in my career as a freelance book editor.

At Indigo Editing & Publications, we work with authors over the course of three distinct rounds of editing: a developmental edit, a line edit, and a proofread.

Which is to say, we don’t cut a comma, question a word choice, or ask to see a single image clarified until the story itself has been nailed down. Doing so would be a waste of the client’s money, and of our time—because the word, sentence, or image in question might not even make the cut for the next draft.

Just as writers are best served by separating drafting from revising, revising is best served by separating work on the story from work on the language itself. It can be hard to do, but it is, without a doubt, the most efficient way to work.

In Conclusion

Certainly, there are exceptions to every rule, and there are some successful authors who meticulously revise as they draft new work (Zadie Smith is a good example). But in my experience, these writers are the exception.

Those who succeed in publishing are usually those who’ve learned how to reliably enter a state of flow, in both drafting and revising—and in most cases, they’ve learned to do it by separating drafting from revising.

Of course, I’m curious about your thoughts on this. When has writing been the most fun for you? How has perfectionism served you as a writer (or held you back)? And what’s the number one most useful writing hack you’ve found?

 


Author Susan DeFreitas

An author, editor, and educator, Susan DeFreitas’s creative work has appeared in (or is forthcoming from) The Writer’s Chronicle, The Utne Reader, Story, Southwestern American Literature, and Weber—The Contemporary West, along with more than twenty other journals and anthologies. She is the author of the novel Hot Season (Harvard Square Editions), which won the 2017 Gold IPPY Award for Best Fiction of the Mountain West. She holds an MFA from Pacific University and lives in Portland, Oregon, where she serves as an editor with Indigo Editing & Publications.

 

 

 

Recommended articles

More recommended articles for you

September 05, 2024 7 min read

Everyone has a pandemic story because it's hard to forget. I remember the quickness of it all — societal norms flipping, turning, and somersaulting, which still makes my head spin. "Stuff is gonna get weird," I remember telling my friend. "Especially art."

August 29, 2024 4 min read

Right now, the choice for a writer to use artificial intelligence (AI) or not has been largely a personal one. Some view it as a killer of creativity, while others see it as an endless well of inspiration.

But what if, in the future, your choice had larger implications on the state of literature as a whole?

This is the question that’s being raised from a new study by the University of Exeter Business School: If you could use AI to improve your own writing, at the expense of the overall literary experience, would you?

Let’s explore some context before you answer.

The Set Up

The 2024 study recruited 293 writers to write an eight-sentence “micro” story. The participants were split into three groups:

  • Writing by human brainpower only
  • The opportunity to get one AI-generated idea to inspire their writing
  • The opportunity to get up to five AI-generated ideas to inspire their writing

Then, 600 evaluators judged how creative these short stories were. The results confirmed a widely accepted idea but also offered a few surprising findings.

Prompts from AI Can Jumpstart the Creative Process

Right off the bat, the reviewers rated the AI-guided stories as being more original, better written, and more enjoyable to read. (Interesting to note that they did not find them funnier than the fully human-inspired stories.)

This actually isn’t that surprising. Most writers know the “blank page dread” at the beginning of a project. Even as I write this, I can’t help but wonder, “If I had been tasked with writing an eight-sentence story, what the heck would I have written about?”

Many writers share this sense of needing to pick the “right” story to tell. And that uniquely human concept of perfectionism can end up actually inhibiting our creative process.

A prompt, then, can help us quickly clear this mental hurdle. To test this, I’ll give you one, courtesy of ChatGPT: “Write a story about a teenager who discovers a mysterious journal that reveals hidden secrets about their town, leading them on an unexpected adventure to uncover the truth.”

Can you feel your creative juices flowing already?

Since its release, AI has been celebrated for its ability to assist in idea generation; and this study confirms how effective using artificial intelligence in this way can be for writers — some, it seems, more than others.

AI-Generated Ideas Helped Less Creative Writers More

It doesn’t feel great to judge a writer’s creative prowess, but for this study, researchers needed to do just that. Prior to writing their short stories, the writers took a test to measure their creativity.

Researchers found that those considered less creative did substantially better when given AI-generated ideas — to the point where getting the full five ideas from AI “effectively equalizes the creativity scores across less and more creative writers.”

This isn’t the case just for writing. Another study by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship WZ also found that AI tools most benefit employees with weaker skills.

So is AI leveling the playing field between okay and great writers? It seems it may be. But before we lament, there’s one more finding that proves using AI isn’t all perks.

AI-Aided Stories Were More Similar — And Needed to Be Credited

The researchers took a step back to look at all the AI-supported stories collectively. And what did they find?

The AI-assisted stories were more similar as a whole, compared to the fully human-written stories.

Additionally, when reviewers were told that a story was enhanced by an AI idea, they “imposed an ownership penalty of at least 25%,” even indicating that “the content creators, on which the models were based, should be compensated.”

This leads us to that all-important question about AI-assisted work: who owns the content?

According to Originality.AI, an AI and plagiarism detector, “When there’s a combination of AI and human-generated elements, the human elements may receive copyright protection if they meet the requirements.”

So right now, if a writer uses AI to generate ideas — but writes the content themselves — they retain rights to the work.

However, Originality.AI even admits that “the legal system is having a hard time keeping up” with the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence. Time will only tell what AI regulations will look like in a few years.

What Does an AI-Assisted Literary Future Look Like?

The researchers from the University of Exeter Business School study raise an interesting point about what the future landscape for writers may look like. If droves of authors begin using AI to come up with ideas, we may end up with a lot of well-written yet dime-a-dozen stories.

So will human beings choose the easier, but less diverse, path? Or will we stick to fighting through writer’s block armed with nothing but our own brain?

Or, a third option: can we somehow learn to harness AI to supercharge our writing process without sacrificing the wholly unique creativity that infuses human creation?

That’s one question that even ChatGPT can’t answer.

Editor's Note: Artificial intelligence may have already transformed writing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be in control of your own words. Read Astrohaus Founder Adam Leeb's statement on AI and privacy.

August 22, 2024 8 min read

While AI has capabilities that range from coding to image generation, the model that excites — and terrifies — writers is the LLM. It won’t be long before we see the world’s first blockbuster novel, written entirely by an LLM. What does this mean for art, and writers in particular? Is it all doom and gloom? The answer is, of course, more complicated than yes or no.