In the past I've always taken the approach of editing my own work. You know, altering my documents with each read through and when I think I've got it as clean as I can possibly manage on my own, it's then that I send it off to fabulous critique partners who find so much more wrong with it. :) They wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't, right! But since it's been a long while since I looked at my first draft of The Unlikely One (actually, I've never read this one through it's entirety as I wrote it in full during NANOWRIMO a couple years ago and then set it aside), so I decided I might be distanced enough from it now to actually critique it as is before starting in on the extensive edits it's sure to need. I feared if I delved right into editing it I'd, 1)feel overwhelmed, and 2)do needless editing on pieces that will have to be massively altered or even deleted once I get the full picture of the novel again. A critique seemed like the way to go at this stage, but I realized I'd never critiqued my own work before.
I'm finding this critiquing strategy quite invigorating, actually. By putting comments and tracker on and sticking to using them to note areas of trouble, I can review my work through much more impartial eyes than I ever could when in editing mode. I know that when I'm done this self-critique, and subsequent required editing, I'll still get lots of suggestions and comments from my critique partners during their go at it. But I have a feeling I'll be much more capable to discern which suggestions to follow and which won't work for me or my story as a result of this first self-critique.
Have you ever critiqued your own novel(s)? If so, did you find it beneficial in the long run, or just a wasted step?
Surrendering to Him,
Eileen
Eileen
