So I finished this 65 page short story about two weeks ago, the story with the male narrator, and I put it away and started working on something else. I knew it wasn't finished, but I wanted to take a little time away from it, so I could figure out what needed to be done to revise it. Now it looks like I'm going to scrap the entire thing and start over.
Re-vision: To see again. I used to think that revision was a matter of line editing, changing a word here or there, maybe knocking out a whole paragraph. Two books later, I understand that revision requires a willingness to completely re-see the project, and to start from the beginning again, if need be. So the first book, which was originally written as a series of interconnected short pieces spanning twenty years, became one comprehensive narrative covering three years. And the second book, which was originally written with two subplots and a really flippant voice, got serious and lost a hundred and fifty pages, then gained fifty new ones.
I have to believe that it wasn't a waste of time, all those discarded drafts, that I could never have made it to the second draft without going through the first. But sometimes I wonder -- maybe it's like a maze, and I could have turned down the right path earlier. Maybe I didn't have to run into the brick wall in order to sense that I was going in the wrong direction. I mean, I knew when I started this story that I wanted it to be short and funny; when I got to page forty or so, I suspected that this wasn't going to be the case. I wrote the next 25 pages anyway.
But I think I know what I want to do to revise it. I want to hew closer to the original premise, which was to write something pithy and masculine. I've been reading the copy of Bastard on the Couch that Virginia loaned me at our writer's group a few weeks ago -- it's helped me to clarify what I think of as a "male" voice. I want my narrator to be more blunt, and more obtuse; less sensitive, with fewer dependent clauses. More dialogue, fewer explanations. Cut out all the backstory. Maybe break it up into numbered sections -- guys seem to like numbered sections. It's not a short story, it's a list!
This is how I see the revision process:
Step one: Print it out.
Step two: Separate it into dramatic beats. Make notes in the margins that indicate what actually happens in each part -- Dan meets Darren. Dan and Jill fight. Dan reflects on his relationship with his mother.
Step three: Take out all the parts where he reflects.
Step four: Kill the backstory.
Step five: Kill the subplot.
Step six: Make a list of the plot points that are left.
Step seven: Rewrite those scenes.
Then put it away again, and once it's sat for two weeks, start over from step one: Print it out.
All of this seems like a really daunting, insurmountable amount of work. Like, wouldn't it be easier to revise my expectations of the piece than to revise the whole piece? So what if I wanted it to be short and punchy and it came out long and feelings-y -- maybe that's just where the story wanted to go, "organically," right? Maybe my first thought was not the best thought, despite all of Allen Ginsburg's exhortations. Couldn't I just, you know, leave it the way it is? Maybe change a few phrases, knock off a paragraph or two, and call it revised?
I guess I could, but, sadly, I know better. A story may have a beginning, middle, and end, but it's not finished until it's revised. That means re-viewed, re-imagined...and re-written.
Recent Comments