6
Step IV: Revise Your Writing—An Overview

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:

• Name the eight points on the Editor’s Checklist.

• Diagnose what’s wrong with a poorly written document.

• Make the first of five sweeps in revising a document.

Every writer needs an editor, and you can learn to be your own.

OLD ATTITUDE

Combine writing and revising. Make the first draft perfect or nearly perfect. Then, go over the draft once at the end to correct errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and typing.

NEW ATTITUDE

Separate writing from revising. Write a first, imperfect draft quickly. Then revise systematically.

REVISE YOUR IDEAS ABOUT REVISING

If you’ve been a writer who tended to revise while drafting, you’re beginning to discover the benefits of separating the two. By separating writing from revising, writers spare themselves the exhaustion of trying to write a perfect draft. They conserve energy by generating an imperfect draft quickly, then revising it efficiently.

They’ve discovered the value of revising as a separate and final step. They know the importance of stepping back and looking at what they’ve written with a different set of eyes, not the eyes of a writer, but the eyes of a reader. They’ve come to appreciate that the editor’s role is to do just that—to look at a document as the readers will.

They also know that revising means going over a document several times to make sure it conveys its message concisely, clearly, dynamically, and accurately. They know that correcting errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and typing is not the first item on an editor’s checklist, but the last.

USE AN EDITOR’S CHECKLIST IN REVISING DOCUMENTS

To help you in the fourth and final step of the BWP, I’ve created an Editor’s Checklist for you to follow. It covers the basic issues you’ll need to address whenever you edit a document, but it doesn’t cover all the issues. Therefore, I hope you’ll add to the checklist as you learn more about editing, be it from professional experience or from using the reference books I’ve listed at the end of this course.

Let me explain how we’re going to use the Editor’s Checklist. First, I’m going to ask you to scan it (See Exhibit 6-1). Second, I’m going to comment on it briefly. Third, I’m going to ask you to use it to diagnose what’s wrong with a particular document—Sample Document II.

Then, I’m going to ask you to make a first “sweep” through Sample Document II, to revise it following the first four points on the Editor’s Checklist.

In Chapters 7 through 10, we’ll continue revising Sample Document II. We’ll look at formatting, streamlining, and clarifying strategies, as well as ways to detect and correct common grammatical errors. As we move from chapter to chapter, we’ll practice using these strategies in revising Sample Document II.

Finally, in Chapter 11, you’ll return to your draft of Sample Document I and revise it according to the strategies you’ve learned. By the end of the course, you will have a final version of your document—one that reflects your mastery of the BWP and of the Editor’s Checklist.

Use the Checklist to Sweep Through Documents

After quickly scanning the checklist, you may feel that the editor’s task is overwhelming. Indeed, it would be if the editor were to try to revise everything all at once. However, professional editors break up the task. They make numerous sweeps through documents and thus make editing a manageable task.

Sweep 1: Check the Draft Against the Outline
Our first sweep will cover the first four points on the Editor’s Checklist. Notice that they sound familiar. In reviewing our purpose, the action we want readers to take, the content, and the sequence, we’re checking the draft against the outline—all that planning we did in Steps 1 and 2 of the BWP.

If we were thorough in Steps 1 and 2, the draft will reflect that thoroughness. As a result, we’ll be able to sweep through the draft without having to do much, if any, revising in this first pass.

In contrast, the last four points in the Editor’s Checklist will require additional time and attention. Therefore, we’ll cover them in separate sweeps.

Sweep 2: Improve the Format
In this sweep, we’ll be looking not at the content, but at the way the content looks on the page. We’ll be using strategies for making the document more inviting to readers through the use of lively headings or headlines, the use of vertical lists, the incorporation of white space, and other formatting options. (We will cover these in detail in Chapter 7.)

Sweep 3: Streamline Sentences
Streamlining sentences means deleting all unnecessary words or ideas. In this sweep, we’ll be dividing long sentences and eliminating words that get in the way of conveying the message. We’ll be making the document concise. (We will cover streamlining in detail in Chapter 8.)

Sweep 4: Clarify Subjects and Verbs
Once streamlined, sentences become shorter—more concise—but that doesn’t necessarily mean they become clearer. So, in this sweep, we’ll clarify who is doing what to whom or to what. In other words, we’ll clarify the subject in the sentence and make sure the subject is active—doing the action of the verb—and not passive—receiving the action of the verb.

In the same sweep, we’ll cover ways of converting weak verbs into strong ones. Weak verbs include the verbs “to be” and “to have.” We’ll practice replacing such verbs, whenever possible, with stronger verbs that clarify action and make it more dynamic. (We will practice converting passive subjects into active ones and transforming weak verbs into strong ones in Chapter 9.)

Sweep 5: Correct Errors in Grammar, Punctuation, Spelling, and Typing
In the fifth and final sweep, we’ll look for and correct common errors in grammar such as dangling and misplaced modifiers. We’ll also look for and correct punctuation, spelling, and typing errors. (Chapter 10 covers some common grammatical problems and lists software programs and reference books that could help you in checking your work.)

Use the Checklist to Diagnose Problems in Sample Document II

Let’s look now at Sample Document II. This internal memo attempts to give Sara Smith, the new vice president for Corporate Sales at Granite Advertising, Inc., an overview of the jobs that Granite has tackled in the first six months of operation and what the fledgling company has learned.

The writer, Andrew Green, is the senior account executive at Granite. He oversees Granite’s relationships with its clients and the day-to-day production issues that arise in meeting clients’ needs. He is writing in response to Sara Smith’s request for this overview.

Read through the memo as if you were Sara Smith, the recipient, and consider how well or poorly it communicates its message.

To: Sara Smith
From: Andrew Green
Date: June 5, 1992
Re: Recent client projects

In our recent efforts to release new products and simultaneously perform benchmarks for potential clients, we have in fact learned a lot. Unfortunately, some of our learning was witnessed by prospective clients (this was bad), but nevertheless in most cases we came out successful and overcame obstacles (this was good). This memo will serve as a recap of the jobs we’ve tackled and information we learned so we can avoid repeating mistakes and hopefully speed up the production process. Our projects tend to be very time consuming, so the more knowledge we can share the better we can expedite the process. Keep in mind we have only done a few actual jobs. The first one was the ACME Supermarket piece. This was purposely designed to avoid complications. It was very simple and was meant to prove a point. Yes, then we went on to Bell, Crossfield, and Scitex. We were successful with this particular project, so we started to undertake more ambitious assignments. Then came the job we did for Tony Cassetta. This one caused us more than a few problems. It was a package design of a Quick Meal box, and we went head to head against Computrim. Real-life jobs have a way of not letting you avoid the things you don’t want to handle, and this was no exception.

Next was a “redeem ourselves” benchmark for XYZ Associates. This was to prove to our local customers that a lot of the problems we had with Tony Cassetta’s project were because we were still using Beta software. This time we asked for a typical job, and we were provided a 4-by-5 transparency and asked to create a label design for rosarita beans. We did a lot better this time. The design worked, but the client was less than satisfied with the color quality on the match print. The last job I will mention in this letter was the Seventh/Connecticut, Inc., job. This was a retouching test and also to see our ability to read in a huge file. Many of the problems we ran into on this one were (believe it or not) caused by the client, not us! We successfully read in the file (much to their surprise) and did a variety of retouching to the image. Then we created another tape for them to send to McDonald Detweiler.

Consider the fact that we are being thrown into the world of print production at a very fast rate and also that the people at the trade shops do not know us very well yet. This combination of confusion complicates matters, so anything we can do as a company to share and document what we’ve learned would be worth its weight in gold.

Use the Checklist to Make the First Sweep in Revising Sample Document II

We are now going to make the first sweep through the memo to Sara Smith. We’re going to revise the document following the first four points on the Editor’s Checklist.

First, make sure that the purpose of the memo is clearly stated at the beginning. Either write a purpose statement or move text that states the purpose to the top.

Second, if it’s not clear what Andrew Green wants Sara Smith to do with this memo, imagine what he might want and write an action statement. Also position this statement strategically.

Third, list the questions you have about the content. Since you’re not content experts, I won’t ask you to supply the missing content. However, you can indicate where holes exist.

Finally, review the sequence of ideas. Is it a logical sequence, or do you think that renumbering paragraphs and sentences would be a good idea? If so, renumber them as you see fit.

 

In Chapter 6, you received an overview of Step IV of the BWP. You became familiar with the Editor’s Checklist for revising documents. You learned that there are at least eight aspects to revising documents. You also learned that the first four of these entail checking your draft against your outline and making necessary revisions. You practiced making a first sweep through a document using the Editor’s Checklist. You can now more fully appreciate the benefit of planning documents before writing them. Planning will save you time in revising.

Answers to “Think About It...” Questions from This Chapter

1. Using the Editor’s Checklist, I identified the following problems in Sample Document II:

• The purpose statement is buried in the first paragraph.

• The action statement is missing.

• The content is incomplete.

• The sequence of ideas seems to be chronological and logical.

• The format is unappealing. The paragraphs are too long. There are no headlines. There is too little white space.

• The sentences are long and padded; they need streamlining.

• Many sentences need clarifying. Passive rather than active subjects abound, as do weak verbs.

• Grammatical problems exist.

How does your list compare to mine?

2. My first sweep consisted of:

• Yanking the purpose statement out of the middle of the first paragraph and putting it at the beginning of the paragraph.

Purpose

This memo will serve as a recap of the jobs we’ve tackled and information we learned so we can avoid repeating mistakes and hopefully speed up the production process. (See full text below.)

• Adding an action requested statement and putting it second, after the purpose statement. (See full text below.)

Response Requested
Please let me know if this recap suits your needs, or if you would like additional information before we meet next Monday.

• Noting the following questions about the content:

• What was the piece that Granite did for ACME Supermarket? What was “simple” about it? What was the “point” it was meant to prove?

• What was the project Granite did for Bell, Crossfield, and Scitex? How was it successful?

• What were some of the problems with the job Granite did for Tony Cassetta? What is his company’s name?

• What was the retouching job Granite did for Seventh/Connecticut, Inc.? Also, what does it mean to “read in a huge file”? Is this jargon that Sara Smith will understand?

• Who is McDonald Detweiler? Is this the name of a person or a company? What is the relationship of McDonald Detweiler to Granite? In other words, why should Sara Smith care about Detweiler?

• What does the phrase “the people in the trade shops don’t understand our business yet” mean? The statement is vague.

• I numbered the sequence of points as follows:

1. Purpose statement.

2. Response requested statement.

3. The ACME Supermarket piece.

4. The project for Bell, Crossfield, and Scitex.

5. The job for Tony Cassetta.

6. The benchmark for XYZ Associates.

7. The job for Seventh/Connecticut, Inc.

8. The summary statement.

In making my first sweep through the document, using the Editor’s Checklist, I thus had to backtrack. I had to go through procedures Andrew Green, the writer, should have gone through when analyzing his purpose and audience and organizing his outline. Clearly, Andrew would benefit from being introduced to the BWP.

Pretending to be Andrew, I answered the questions about the content. I then made my first sweep and revised the draft following the first four points on the Editor’s Checklist. Notice that I numbered the main points, but did not attempt to revise the document to make shorter paragraphs. We will do that in the next sweep. The draft, after the first sweep, now reads as follows:

(1) Purpose
This memo will serve as a recap of the jobs we’ve tackled and information we learned so we can avoid repeating mistakes and hopefully speed up the production process. In our recent efforts to release new products and simultaneously perform benchmarks for potential clients, we have in fact learned a lot. Unfortunately, some of our learning was witnessed by prospective clients (this was bad), but nevertheless in most cases we came out successful and overcame obstacles (this was good). Our projects tend to be very time consuming, so the more knowledge we can share the better we can expedite the process. Keep in mind we have only done a few actual jobs.

(2) Response Requested
Please let me know if this recap suits your needs or if you would like additional information before we meet next Monday.

(3) The first job was the sales promo piece we did for ACME Supermarket. This was purposely designed to avoid complications. It was very simple and was meant to prove a point: that we could produce full-page newspaper ads for their chain’s weekly sales. (4) Yes, then we went on to Bell, Crossfield, and Scitex and did a half-page, black-and-white, newspaper ad on their computer consulting services. We were successful with this particular project, so we started to undertake more ambitious assignments. (5) Then came the job we did for Tony Cassetta of Vinioli/Cassetta. This one caused us more than a few problems in getting the color separations right. It was a package design of a Quick Meal box, and we went head to head against Computrim. Real-life jobs have a way of not letting you avoid the things you don’t want to handle, and this was no exception.

(6) Next was a “redeem ourselves” benchmark for XYZ Associates. This was to prove to our local customers that a lot of the problems we had with Tony Cassetta’s project were because we were still using Beta software. This time we asked for a typical job, and we were provided a 4-by-5 transparency showing a box of rosarita beans and were asked to create a label design for the box. We did a lot better this time. The design job worked, but the client was less than satisfied with the color quality on the match print. (7) The last job I will mention in this letter was the Seventh/Connecticut, Inc., job. This was a retouching test. We had to retouch the image on the cover of their five-year facilities enhancement plan. It was also a test to see our ability to convert, mark up, and typeset a huge file, with over a hundred exhibits. Many of the problems we ran into on this one were (believe it or not) caused by the client, not us! We successfully converted the file (much to their surprise) and did a variety of retouching to the image. Then we created another tape for them to send to McDonald Detweiler, their parent company, which is international. McDonald Detweiler is now interested in having us do some work for their other subsidiaries.

(8) Consider the fact that we are being thrown into the world of print production at a very fast rate and also that the people at the print shops we’re now dealing with don’t know us very well yet. This combination of confusion complicates matters. So anything we can do as a company to share and document what we’ve learned would be worth its weight in gold.

How does your first sweep through Sample Document II compare to mine?