Back to Basics: Embracing Revision

Izhan Arif
10 hours ago
4 min read

For this Back to Basics mini-course, we’re trying to embrace revisions—as a process. Let’s look at the basics.

Getting a first draft of anything done, be it an essay, a novel, or anything in between, is grueling. Something special happens when you complete a draft: it gives you an almost indescribable feeling of joy. Sometimes we’re so proud of what we made that it can be hard to find any fault with it. But even if you think your first draft is perfect, it can never hurt to try and reflect on what’s been written.

To quote Jack Shephard from Lost, “we have to go back!” Quick side tangent, but you should check out Lost! It’s a pretty fun tv show, even if the finale is divisive. My brother went to Hawaii and even got to see parts of where it was filmed on his honeymoon. Ok side tangent over, back to what you’re really here for: talking about writing. First drafts are a journey and when that journey is complete, the idea of having to do it over again is naturally daunting. But revision doesn’t have to be starting the story over. In this Back to Basics course, we’re talking all about how to embrace revision in the writing process.

What does revision look like?

The act of revision is going back to something that was previously written and making improvements to strengthen the writing, either through the content of the story, or through stuff like grammar and punctuation. More often than not though writers mostly look at revision through the context of what will make the story itself better. Don’t get me wrong, grammar and punctuation are certainly important, but they’re more of what you’re fixing on the surface. As with all good writing, we’re most interested with what lies under the surface, ie: the content of the story. You want to figure out what works but what’s really important is isolating what in your story isn’t working. Does that scene which takes place inside a haunted house capture the right spooky vibes? Does that scene where a high-level attorney from New York and a rural farmer from Missouri chit-chatting over coffee have clunky, robotic dialogue? Sometimes a writer can find all of these problems out on their own, and it’s awesome if they can. However, the best revision often comes after your work has been reviewed by completely fresh eyes.

How do we make sense of constructive criticism?

Constructive criticism happens when someone else, typically another writer in these specific circumstances, looks through your story with an unbiased eye and identifies the strengths and weaknesses in your story. Honestly? It’s a tough gig. Sure, telling people what’s great is fun, because everyone wants to hear that they’re great and that everything about their writing just clicks perfectly. That being said though, there’s always going to be something that sticks out that can be improved.

It’s important to recognize that constructive criticism is NOT meant to be an attack on your writing—or on you as a person. If you ever find a piece of feedback that’s incredibly harsh and genuinely mean-spirited, that’s not being constructive, that’s just being rude. You can even call this an example of "destructive criticism”. With constructive criticism, the goal is to be positive-minded. Sure, every story can have flaws, but they should be addressed with respect and helpful observations.

It’s worth mentioning that even with respect in mind, our first reaction when hearing anything even slightly critical is to get a bit flustered or defensive. After all, we don’t like to hear that elements of our writing aren't working, that’s only human. However, if you remember that constructive criticism is meant to help you, and that the person giving it to you isn’t trying to attack you or your abilities, then it’s easier to work past the initial upset feelings of having flaws and instead focus on fixing them.

So we go through constructive criticism, now what?

To put it simply, you want to take what you learn, and apply it. Let’s say I wrote a story about a supervillain who, in the last chapter, is defeated by a random super-powered person I introduced at the final moment. Let’s also say that this is a character who I gave no prior information about, and only exists in the story to beat up the bad guy at the end. Let’s then say I got constructive criticism highlighting that the superpowered rando coming in to save the day felt abrupt and unearned. Feedback could then suggest it would be wise to instead either: remove him completely, or introduce him earlier in the story. That way, his powers and backstory are integrated into the story naturally, so that when he does beat the bad guy, the reader knows he can/will.

This example is called a "deus ex machina", or "a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty" (Merriam-Webster, 2026). I’ve also shown how I could fix my story to make this problematic deus ex machina disappear. When you’re able to fix these types of story problems, you can create a much more satisfying second or third draft. You can theoretically revise a piece as many times as you want, but I’d highly recommend keeping it simple: write a first draft of your story, get some feedback, then create a second, and possibly a third final draft with all of the feedback you’ve gained in mind.

Ultimately, embracing revision is a crucial next step in the writing process but you don’t want to constantly revise over and over for eternity. Nothing can ever be perfect. Not really.

Thanks for joining us for this Back to Basics! Special thanks to Charlotte for helping with the research for this topic.