Thread by @WmGermano

1/10 Some notes on revising, especially for academics who write. @UChicagoPress

Revising is figuring out what you really think, or getting as close as you can. You may do it once or a dozen times. But you do it for the reader. Always for the reader.

2/10 Knowing that you need to revise is never a sign of failure. It’s what every writer does and knows. Good stuff gets cut b/c it’s not doing the work you want it to.

3/10 So you need to know what work you want the writing to do, and what you hope your reader will do with it in turn. That’s point and consequence.

4/10 Good revision is sometimes self-centered (“So what do I think?”), but always generous (“Hey reader, I made this for you”).

5/10 You won’t get lost in the revising weeds if you can concentrate on three axes: Argument, Architecture, and Audience. (Don’t have an axe to grind when you’re revising. Have three.)

6/10 What’s an argument? Sometimes it’s really more of a compelling question about something that bothers you. That can be plenty. Don’t be fixated on solving for x. Your contribution may be the discovery of x and the gift of ways to think about x.

7/10 Architecture isn’t just making shapely chapters. It’s using language to build a habitable space for your ideas and your reader. So a book is more like a workshop than a museum. Appealing units, good directional signals, openings and closings.

8/10 True fact: no reader, no book. So as you revise, pay special attention to what your reader will hear. You wrote it, but the reader makes the writing happen, or at least turns the ignition key. You want there to be a hum.

9/10 A hum and a narrative. Writers are storytellers. Even scholarly writers are storytellers. Link the pieces. Keep the lights on in your writing.

10/10 Leave out what you don’t need, which means most of your homework. Revise for better, not for perfect. Better is often shorter, simpler, but also clearer and riskier. You can do this.

I wrote this to help.