Re-envisioning: Note the difference between editing and revising. An edit fixes the language and grammar errors in a paper so it is stylistically correct. A revision is a much more serious affair. To revise (L. re, “again” + videre, “to see”) is to see again, to re-envision the core ideas of a paper. Revision is a re-thinking of both the reading that went into an interpretation and the writing that went into a paper.
Perhaps the most crucial strategy for revision – it’s really a mindset – is not to be tied to what’s written in a paper just because you wrote it. This commitment can emerge when you determine you’ve fulfilled the criteria of an assignment, but don’t confuse “fulfilled the criteria of the assignment” with “written a good paper.”
Here is probably the most important advice you will ever hear about writing: revision is not about improving a paper that has already been written; it’s about writing a new paper. Many times, the seeds of great arguments appear in the conclusion of a first draft, after you have considerably analyzed and explored the material. A new paper built around that late-breaking discovery will be better than the paper you previously wrote because you’ve had that earlier experience working with the idea, and you know what works and what doesn’t, what’s relevant and what isn’t.
In other words, don’t think of it as revising a paper. Think of it as revising an idea and then writing a new paper for that revised idea.
Because revision is about starting anew, start over on your paper with a blank page in your word processing program. Don’t go back to the original document and try to adjust it. Instead, create an entirely new document and start from scratch, even if, at times, you’re merely retyping from your previous draft. What you’ll find is that you’ll revise and improve both ideas and language as you re-enter them.
Revision is often about making a paper better by making it shorter. If you can express in eight pages what it previously took you ten pages to express, then you’ve written a better paper.
One thing that often happens in my revision process is that I’ll find myself saying, “I can’t get rid of that sentence,” and, “I definitely need that paragraph.” If I leave the paper, however, and come back to it a month later, when I’m not as deeply invested in every word that I’ve written, I’ll find myself looking at the same paper and saying, “I can get rid of that sentence,” and, “I really don’t need that paragraph.”
One strategy to help you get over your own investedness in every single word you’ve written is to treat each revision as a hypothetical – for example, saying something like, “If I were to cut the section on pages 7-11, what would I need to do to make the paper coherent?”
If you have a marked copy of your paper, highlight each mark as you revise it to ensure you’ve covered everything. At the same time, understand that commenters (whether peers or instructors) rarely mark every single error. It’s important for you to understand why a certain error was marked, and to recognize it elsewhere in your paper even when it hasn’t been marked.
Here’s what I do when I receive comments back from readers: I break down these comments into each individual suggestion. I make a list of these suggestions, and then I write what I would do if I were to revise my paper on the basis of each suggestion. I don’t always choose to include every revision, but it helps me create options to choose between.
Drafts: A draft is not the first version of a paper that will be revised and refined into a polished form. A draft is the first version of an idea. That idea will change and evolve. Make sure that you’re revising ideas, and not papers. Sometimes a draft will generate an idea that was not planned. Sometimes one paragraph or even one sentence will contain the germ of an idea that is worthy of development.
The Assignment: Re-read the assignment prompt, and make sure your paper fulfills the assignment. Don’t hesitate to crop ideas from the assignment to articulate your thesis. The assignment is there to help you frame your paper, so let it.
Feedback: Like most teachers, my comments on student papers usually address two areas: language and ideas. In terms of language, I don’t mark every single error in every single paper, except in special circumstances. Instead, I identify for you the name of the punctuation, grammar, or style rule or tip that’s being violated; it’s up to you, then, to go to a writing guide or my handouts in order to understand the rule or tip, to correct it in the instance I marked, and also to fix it throughout your paper. In terms of ideas, my comments on papers are usually geared toward revision: rather than merely tell you what’s good or bad, right or wrong, persuasive or not, I try to tell you how to improve your argument. This often takes the form, This is bad; don’t do this again, or That is good; do more of that. It’s important to understand what you did well in a paper, so that you can apply that success to the rest of your paper.
Editing: The first and last steps of revision are editing. That is, you’ll edit once before you revise, then revise, then edit again after you revise (because you’re revision will, if done properly, introduce entire new sentences and entire new paragraphs, which will potentially introduce new language errors). First fix any typos and errors of formatting based on the academic style you’re using (MLA, Chicago, APA, etc.). Second fix errors of punctuation: correct your use of commas, semi-colons, colons, dashes, hyphens, apostrophes, parentheses, contractions, post-positives, capitalizations, italics, and quotation marks; be especially certain to fix any errors of quotation: commas and colons for introducing quotes, punctuation for ending quotes, citations, block quotes, ellipses, and interpolations. Then fix errors of language: revise for concision and clarity, use the active voice, use verbs for action, use parallel structures, stay in an academic tone, write to the unknown reader, use plain English, be specific, remove empty intensifiers, and re-write fragments, run-ons, sloppy subordinate clauses, and sentences that are too short or too long.
Concision: The second and second-to-last steps of revision are refining your prose. First examine each paragraph to see how you can make it sharper and shorter. Then do the same for each sentence within those paragraphs. Try shortening the length of your paper by 20%, which will require you to focus your argument and select your evidence more carefully. If you have a 400-word paragraph, try to get through it in 300 words without losing any meaning. Keeping in mind the overall argument of your paper, as well as the more specific assertion of a particular paragraph, study each of your sentences to see if it can be deleted without losing meaning or emphasis. Make sure each clause in each sentence supports the point you’re making in that sentence. Make sure each sentence in each paragraph supports the point you’re making in that paragraph. Make sure each paragraph in each paper supports the point you’re making in that paper.
Text: Your text is the thing you’re interpreting. Your argument is your interpretation of that thing. As such, your text is a promise to interpret something, and your argument the fulfillment of that promise. Make sure that you’re clear about what you’re promising to interpret and that you actually fulfill that promise (i.e., your argument is responsive to your text). It’s quite possible that you didn’t really know what you were arguing as you wrote your previous draft, that you were figuring it out as you were writing. Likewise, it’s possible that you discovered something significant in the act of writing. Often, in these instances, this development in your understanding is not reflected in your paper (usually because you lacked the time and energy to revise your argument accordingly). That is, the text or topic you propose to investigate near the beginning of your draft may not accurately identify the analyses you perform throughout the paper. Again, make sure your text (the thing your interpreting) and your argument (your interpretation of that thing) are responsive to each other.
Logic: Consider the logic of your interpretation: not the organization of your paper, but the logic of your interpretation. What causes what to happen? What are the premises of your argument? Are these premises the logical conclusion of the evidence you’ve offered? If not, then you need to offer more evidence. What is the conclusion of your argument? Is it the logical conclusion of your premises? You should be able to draw or chart the logical progression of your ideas, and to chart your logic in a flow chart.
Assertions: Identify the central claim of each paragraph; that claim is the reason that paragraph needs to exist, and it should appear in the first sentence (or very near it). Make sure everything in that paragraph goes to support that claim; cut out any material that goes off-track.
Organization: Create an outline of your paper as it currently stands, and then ask if that is the most effective way to move through your argument. The answer will almost always be, “No.” Your paper should break a problem down into its simple, comprehensive parts and discuss them, one by one, in a logical order. A clear paragraph explains one of these parts coherently, thoroughly, and in language as simple and particular as the reader’s understanding requires and the context allows. Try writing out the assertion of each paragraph in just three to five words. Then look at the progression of your paragraphs and determine (in the context of your logic) if the order in which they currently exist is the best order. “Logic” means figuring out what idea should come first because it is fundamental to your entire train of inference. Then make sure that each subsequent sentence/paragraph follows – can be inferred – from the one(s) preceding it. If it can’t, then you need to insert the missing idea/sentence or argument/paragraph before you move to your next point. Put your sentences in a logical order within each paragraph, and your paragraphs in a logical order in the paper as a whole.
Exemplar: Consider moving your best evidence to the very start of your paper, where it can ground your discussion with particularity. This exemplar will also help you to avoid the tendency to begin a paper with sweeping and tendentious generalizations. We acquire understanding of something new from specifics, not generalities, so be kind to your reader and give him or her some particularity.
Introductions: Start your paper fast, without abstract or feel-good introductions; get straight to the text, or at least the tension at hand.
Argument: Your argument should be the logical conclusion of all your assertions. One strategy for revision is to move what you thought was your conclusion to the introduction of your paper, where it will usually do a better job stating your argument than the thesis that originally began the paper (when you didn’t know precisely what you would argue).
Evidence: By the same token, your new understanding of the text, as stated in your revised argument, will require you to change aspects of your analyses and allow you to include new evidence and analyses that previously weren’t evident. These revised analyses will, in turn, allow you to revisit your argument again, and having done so you’ll realize that there are still additional or different analyses you should include in your paper. Revision is largely about this back-and-forth between revising argument and revising analysis. A revision tends to decrease the amount of quotation (because you have a better sense of what your argument is and what evidence you really need).
Concision: Remember, the second-to-last step of revision is refining your prose. Repeat the steps described above.
Editing: Again, remember that the last step of revision is editing. Repeat the steps described above.
Title: Write your title last. Rather than cleverness, aim for a precise description of your analysis. Your title should be specific enough that it couldn’t be used for any paper other than the one you’ve written. Avoid question marks in titles. Use a colon to separate two parts of a title. Except in rare cases, the complete title should not exceed 12 words.
Figurative Language: Once you’re confident in your paper, you may want to go back and include some figurative language: a metaphor that might simplify a complex idea, imagery that establishes the mood of your interpretation, or jokes (which are, when executed effectively, very welcome in a paper). Try to include a few “curveballs” in your paper: moments that, by bucking the conventions of academic writing, display your personality as a thinker and a writer. It’s important to write these rhetorical fireworks last of all, so that you’re tailoring your figurative language to your claims (rather than your claims to your figurative language).