Thank you, Allison. I especially love your tips about cataloging post-publication concerns and seeing early-draft crutch words as a way to understand the scene first. I love how you’re helping us turn these flaws into growth. 🫶
This is a very solid breakdown of the practical realities of self-editing, especially the distinction between drafting energy and editorial cognition. A lot of writers sabotage momentum by attempting to generate and evaluate simultaneously, which usually results in premature tightening of the prose before the structure has fully discovered itself.
I also appreciated the emphasis on editing in passes. Developmental issues, line-level rhythm, and copy-level correction require fundamentally different modes of attention, and conflating them too early often leads writers to over-polish material that may later need restructuring or removal altogether.
What I find especially important in editorial work, though, is recognising that not every recurring issue is merely technical. Repetition, overwriting, pacing collapse, tonal instability, excessive exposition, or “crutch language” often point toward deeper structural uncertainty inside the manuscript itself. Sometimes the prose is not failing grammatically. It is compensating psychologically.
A manuscript frequently reveals where the author trusts the reader, where they do not, where they are avoiding emotional arrival, or where the conceptual spine of the work has not yet fully clarified itself. That is where editing becomes less about correction and more about perception.
Really thoughtful and genuinely useful piece, Allison.
Thanks, Sara. I really appreciate your thoughtful comment. The psychology aspect is huge. I often see this with memoir and fiction that centers on deep, intense themes that are related to the author's experience. Our nervous systems always want to protect us, even during creative work. And those moments can be disguised as technical issues with the manuscript.
Exactly. And I think this is one of the least discussed aspects of writing craft because it sits in an uncomfortable space between aesthetics, psychology, and self-perception. A manuscript is rarely just “content.” It is often a negotiated relationship between what the person consciously wants to say and what the nervous system believes is safe to reveal, approach, destabilize, or fully feel. Which is why certain scenes become strangely overworked, emotionally distant, structurally evasive, excessively intellectualized, or unexpectedly flat despite technical competence. The prose itself begins regulating exposure. I see this especially in memoir, but fiction absolutely carries it too, often through displacement, fragmentation, symbolic substitution, or tonal deflection. And interestingly, sometimes the breakthrough in editing is not finding a better sentence. It is helping the writer realize what the text has been circling around the entire time.
That is where editing becomes something much deeper than correction.
This is fantastic help. I'm in the process of editing right now. This is my draft three... ugh... I hate that, but midway through draft two, two things happened, my writing style evolved and I wound up needing to lop the book in half.
I'm fairly confident with this one I'll hit that STOP point you talked about.
Great tips! Reading it out loud (or having your computer/device read it to you) and stepping away for a while are go-tos for self-editing.
Glad it’s helpful for you! Thanks for reading.
Thank you, this is a great advice! 🙂
You’re very welcome! I’m so glad it’s useful for you.
loved it! soo many good ideas for me in this!
Amazing!! 🤗
Thank you, Allison. I especially love your tips about cataloging post-publication concerns and seeing early-draft crutch words as a way to understand the scene first. I love how you’re helping us turn these flaws into growth. 🫶
You’re very welcome! I love hearing how these posts are helpful. I appreciate you!
This was helpful, especially the breakdown of proper editing stages. Thank you!
My pleasure! Thanks for being here. 🙂
This is a very solid breakdown of the practical realities of self-editing, especially the distinction between drafting energy and editorial cognition. A lot of writers sabotage momentum by attempting to generate and evaluate simultaneously, which usually results in premature tightening of the prose before the structure has fully discovered itself.
I also appreciated the emphasis on editing in passes. Developmental issues, line-level rhythm, and copy-level correction require fundamentally different modes of attention, and conflating them too early often leads writers to over-polish material that may later need restructuring or removal altogether.
What I find especially important in editorial work, though, is recognising that not every recurring issue is merely technical. Repetition, overwriting, pacing collapse, tonal instability, excessive exposition, or “crutch language” often point toward deeper structural uncertainty inside the manuscript itself. Sometimes the prose is not failing grammatically. It is compensating psychologically.
A manuscript frequently reveals where the author trusts the reader, where they do not, where they are avoiding emotional arrival, or where the conceptual spine of the work has not yet fully clarified itself. That is where editing becomes less about correction and more about perception.
Really thoughtful and genuinely useful piece, Allison.
Thanks, Sara. I really appreciate your thoughtful comment. The psychology aspect is huge. I often see this with memoir and fiction that centers on deep, intense themes that are related to the author's experience. Our nervous systems always want to protect us, even during creative work. And those moments can be disguised as technical issues with the manuscript.
Thanks for reading and for being here.
Exactly. And I think this is one of the least discussed aspects of writing craft because it sits in an uncomfortable space between aesthetics, psychology, and self-perception. A manuscript is rarely just “content.” It is often a negotiated relationship between what the person consciously wants to say and what the nervous system believes is safe to reveal, approach, destabilize, or fully feel. Which is why certain scenes become strangely overworked, emotionally distant, structurally evasive, excessively intellectualized, or unexpectedly flat despite technical competence. The prose itself begins regulating exposure. I see this especially in memoir, but fiction absolutely carries it too, often through displacement, fragmentation, symbolic substitution, or tonal deflection. And interestingly, sometimes the breakthrough in editing is not finding a better sentence. It is helping the writer realize what the text has been circling around the entire time.
That is where editing becomes something much deeper than correction.
Yes, yes, yes!! So beautifully stated. I'm thinking we might need to collaborate on a post about this...
Good idea:)
This is fantastic help. I'm in the process of editing right now. This is my draft three... ugh... I hate that, but midway through draft two, two things happened, my writing style evolved and I wound up needing to lop the book in half.
I'm fairly confident with this one I'll hit that STOP point you talked about.