Discussion: The terror of rewriting

As I assemble feedback from editor-readers of the fourth draft, I am heartened, terrified, but encouraged. This is a sample of my process journal; a look at the right now.

With ‘Hiram Falls News’ I will update you on my progress with the novel, Hiram Falls, and, once finished, I’ll alert you with news and events, discussion groups and other places and other formats to experience the book.

It has been two weeks since I received the first of several extended critiques of the fourth draft of my novel. Now several other editor-readers are weighing in.

The headline: It is nearly there. Or is it? 

The first editor: The story hangs together, the characters are believable, the bones are there, the voices are there. But. But. There’s not enough surprise. What is the understory, the reason I will change because I’ve read your book?

Whoa. Can I possibly get this book to that level?

The second reader: You’re still writing like a journalist, Gevalt. You are at a distance from your characters You need to get inside them, show me how they are feeling, what they are thinking.

Oh dear. I knew that.

The first offered a path: Be analytical. Find and define the understory for yourself, the reason this book is. And where’s the humor?

The second did, too: It’s almost like in some places you’re listing the scenes you want to write about. Write them. 

The first: This book needs to be longer. The prologue confused me, slowed me down. Do you need it. … Cutting gives you room to expand. 

The second: I understand why you ditched the whole love thing between David and Grace but why the fuck did you do that? At least make it simmer, smolder… (I tell her my idea for a new ending for them. She likes it.)

The first: How can you make the stories of each of the characters intertwine better? And what changes do they go through?

The second: Where are the kids?

The first: You have too much packed into two time periods, 1918 and 1973. Why? And why do you not develop the generations better? Why not show the passage of time.

The third: You’ve written yourself a good fucking novel. The bones are there. I can see the town, feel the characters, hear their voices. Compelling stuff. But. But… Can you go deeper? 

The first: Would I buy this on the remainder table? No. Not yet.

Ouch. 

But I asked for this. I lined up people who know me, know my intentions, know the quality I want to attain, know I want the cold truth. Two others will weigh in soon. But I already know.

So I’ll go deeper. I will show more, bring in some kids, space the chapters out better to cover the passing time, cut and expand. 

I am analyzing — the hard part; the not-writing part. 

I am assembling colored stickies (different color for each main character) and setting up a timeline on my white board. 

I am defining (trying to define at least) the understory or backbone: A small rural town that won’t let go. Characters trying to find answers to questions they don’t yet know. Or, characters to understand how to escape their legacy. Yech. Not yet.

I have begun to go back through each of the chapters and am setting up an index for each on Scrivener with tags for what needs to be changed, expanded, edited or researched. 

I am putting a headline for each chapter on a sticky note to put on the white board.

I am making a summary of each character: their wants/needs, obstacles, dreams, attributes, relationships with others. 

All this so I have it in my head. More clearly. Secure. Confident.

Then I’ll begin the rewrite.

---

What are your thoughts? Have you experienced a similar challenge? How do you handle planning for a revision? Is anything in here helpful at all?