It usually takes me a couple of days to do a first-pass edit. A week or two is long enough to let it sit. The problem with letting it sit 3 months, is you could have it out to beta readers and have their feedback, which would make August far more productive.

 

Good point.

 

Ideally for me, a week. I write the first draft, which includes going back over it and touching it up just a bit, then send it off to an editor and beta reader for their critique. That takes about a week. Once I get it back, I start revisions right away.

Or, I procrastinate and end up so far behind schedule that I am still writing the last 1/3 of the book while the first 2/3 are being critiqued, and then the whole thing gets revised in a sleepless night of coffee consumption so it can be launched according to the deadline I foolishly announced and/or set up as a preorder. But I don't recommend that way.

 

Ideally I like to leave it for a month but sometimes I am drawn back to it before then, especially if I'm already aware of some plot glitch that has to be fixed. Last time it was about 2 weeks, and for reasons to do with my word target for Camp Nanowrimo I had started writing a completely different novel in a different genre in the mean-time, which wasn't all that great an idea!

 

I actually prefer to have a decent break from a book between drafts, especially the first and second drafts, to give me more distance and objectivity. I find I'm much better able to see what needs to be worked on and how to do so if I give myself at least a month. Sometimes I take longer if I have a bunch of other projects I'm bouncing between, and it's definitely never hurt. But I agree that this is a great time to get outside feedback (I usually send drafts to my critique partners during that month or more).

 

I'll often leave it a couple of weeks, and in that space, to get completely away from it, bash out a short story. Maybe a 10000 word novelette. I think this helps knock the book out of your mind a little, and so you'll come back to it two weeks later somewhat refreshed.

 

I don't. As soon as I finish a book, I typically turn around and start my edits/polishing. I like that the book is fresh in my head and I have a very clear sense of what needs to be changed or added. And the sooner I can get a book off my desk and on to my editor, the happier I am.

 

I usually let a novel sit for six weeks or so.  In the meantime I try to write a first draft of a new novel in a completely different genre so I can turn my mind away from the book.  Then when I go back I'm reading it like a reader and can see all the flaws that need fixed.  After the second draft, though, I usually work straight through on drafts until it's done.  Then again, I'm a pantser, so sometimes that first draft is as much about what the story shouldn't be as what it should be.

 

I like to wait at least two weeks, but I find if I wait a little longer than that - like a month or so - it's easier to look at my book with fresh eyes.

 

I edit while I write, so... 0 days?

Seriously, nothing gets you in the mood to write more than editing the chapters you wrote the day before.

 

My first novel was originally written in the 1990s. It attracted an agent, was a finalist in a mystery writing contest, but never got (traditionally) published. After a few years of pushing, I finally gave up, put it into a drawer and moved on with my life. Fifteen years later, with the advent of eBooks, I took it out of the drawer and re-wrote it. I did not make huge changes to the story, but rather found things that needed to be clarified, refined and polished. It is definitely a stronger novel now.

That said, I would never recommend waiting fifteen years to do a re-write, but giving yourself some distance, even if it's just a month, will definitely let you approach the story from a fresher, more objective point of view.

 

.

 

A couple of days, maybe a week at most.

 

This.

If the book sits, it's too easy for me to lose all the subtle and layered nuances woven into everything, (foreshadowing, metaphor, theme, motif, character voice, social commentary, etc). I always work straight through, and regardless of how many notes I make, I'm terrified of forgetting stuff as it is, of losing the vibe. I edit as I go as well, but that doesn't prevent the major re-writing thing at the end.

That's the point of giving it time. Your readers have none of the 'nuance', none of the 'vibe'.

 

.

 

I try to leave my first draft alone without even thinking about it for at least four weeks. When I pick it back up it feels like someone else wrote it and I find I'm able to approach the first edit far more objectively.

But that's what works for me. We're all different.

 

This is definitely a YMMV thing.

I'm in the "let it sit" camp. I have three manuscripts sitting right now, one I finished last September, one I finished in November, and a third I finished in April. I was writing stuff in between there that I wrote/edited/released in short order, but that's not normal for me. Usually I let things simmer.

Part of it is that I can't write one book and edit another at the same time (it's, like, mentally impossible for me to shift gears like that every day).

But mostly it's that taking a good long break from a book gives me that fresh perspective I need to look at it the way an outside editor would.

It allows me to read my draft like a reader coming to it for the very first time. I think it's important to have that phase of disconnection from a work. You've forgotten all about your 'darlings' and it's easier to stab them in the throat when needs be. You've forgotten the nuances, subplots, and character motivations, and it's easier to detect where they're lacking and how they need to be improved.

One other thing a long break allows, specifically if you're writing in a series, is retro-fitting. I don't plot out every book in advance, so I like going back to earlier books to seed for future books. Working on Book 3 in one of my series, I discovered that one of my subplots will come off stronger if a minor character who appears in the first few chapters of Book 1 makes a throwaway comment about Topic X, so I went back and added that in. That one sentence turned out to be a pretty big deal

 

I wait somewhere between one and two years.

The most important thing for me is to complete the first draft a story, and then start the first draft of the next story.  Since I write series, I don't publish the first story until the first draft of the last story in the series is completely written.

The novellas that I have listed on my signature bar were stories I completed the first drafts between three and four years ago.

 

Ideally for me, a week. I write the first draft, which includes going back over it and touching it up just a bit, then send it off to an editor and beta reader for their critique. That takes about a week. Once I get it back, I start revisions right away.

Or, I procrastinate and end up so far behind schedule that I am still writing the last 1/3 of the book while the first 2/3 are being critiqued, and then the whole thing gets revised in a sleepless night of coffee consumption so it can be launched according to the deadline I foolishly announced and/or set up as a preorder. But I don't recommend that way.

Sounds like my plan! I don't recommend it either, but I can't seem to stop.

 

I don't understand. What do my readers have to do with me writing a cohesive book?

Your readers are going in blind, essentially. You might think you've communicated something clearly enough because it's clear in your head, but it might not come across so clearly - or at all - to someone who is reading the story for the first time. If you give it some time, you become more objective about what your story is expressing and what might need more or less emphasis. This is particularly true for subtlety and subtext.

 

Usually 2 days.

I edit a lot while I write now so the 2nd draft is a pretty minor "fix-it" pass.

 

For me, I generally do a minimum of 30 days, and usually ends up being a couple of months.  I'm starting to think I need to do minimum 2-3 months, though, from my experiences with my most recent novel though.  In either case, if I try to turn around and go right back into it, I don't see the big story issues as easily and I tend to get burned out on the story and thus struggle to do any revision, leaving it languishing.  After the break, I start revision by reading the draft like I would any novel, which is pretty much all I need to really get back into the story (if it ever doesn't get me excited about editing, it gets trunked, either temporarily or permanently).

So far, at least, I've usually managed to time it so I have one revised novel off to my editor while I'm doing a new one, so by the time it comes back, it's easy to put the new one aside to rest while I process the edits from novel 1 and get ready for release, so it isn't like the break time is totally wasted.

Much like the pantsing vs plotting debate, it really depends on the writer, though, so I'd say experiment to see what works best for you

 

.

 

So much good advice here! I tend to edit as I go, but while my first drafts are "lean and clean" there are always things to fix. I can still see advantages both ways. I may have to just see if I can play it by ear or something. Thanks for all the input! I'm glad to see that there are so many different opinions. Makes me feel less crazy debating the best way for this story.

 

I don't. I edit a great deal as I go and have alpha readers who give me feedback as I go, though.