Original manuscript:
450 pages
91,174 words (computer)
112,500 words (250 wpp estimate)

New, chainsawed version:
319 pages
67,974 words (computer)
79,750 words (250 wpp estimate)

Which gives me an average cuttage of thirty per cent. Not bad for a weekend’s work.

Now I am going to go collapse somewhere.

17 Responses | TrackBack URL | Comments Feed

1. 
   At 2:41 am Sharon J said:

   You’ve stumped me. What’s this ‘white space’ malarkey? I know how to get word to count my words but I’m obviously missing something important. A quick explanation, if you have time, would be much appreciated ~Sharon

   Reply
2. 
   At 4:22 am Lis said:

   Congrats on cutting so much!
   I’m guessing white space is the old 250 words/page count?

   Reply
3. 
   At 5:58 am Julie said:

   Actually now that I think of it I have no idea whether it’s called “white space” or not, I think I heard that somewhere. I was very tired last night.

   Anyway I meant the formula that says if I have 25 lines per page, I can assume I have 250 words per page, and calculate word count accordingly by multiplying the number of pages by 250. My actual word count is always much lower than that because I write so dialogue-heavy, in short paragraphs, and with this book, with short chapters, often with a lot of blank space at the beginning and end.

   I’m going to edit the post so it makes more sense and so that everyone reading it after this will have no idea what we’re talking about here…

   Reply
4. 
   At 6:14 am Michelle Styles said:

   Yes, white space is the same as word page count. You are making allownaces for the fact that the white spaces are actually take up real space in a book. Straight computer count makes no allowances for such things.
   Congrats on getting it cut. Fingers crossed majorily for you.

   Reply
5. 
   At 6:27 am Julie said:

   Thanks Michelle, good to know I am not insane.

   You know, I cut 131 pages, but I still managed to put more llamas in there.

   Reply
6. 
   At 11:06 am Sharon J said:

   Right. Thanks. Yes, I’d heard about the 250 words thing but wasn’t sure how it worked. Now I know and for that I’m grateful. Must bear that in mind as my writing’s pretty dialogue heavy, too. ~Sharon

   Reply
7. 
   At 11:45 am Michelle said:

   WTG on cutting so much! I use the word page count myself, because it depresses me to use the computer count. My current mss. is 90,000 words via page count but 75,000 with computer count. Sigh.

   Reply
8. 
   At 12:37 pm Margaret McDonagh said:

   Congratulations, Julie, a great achievement. I’m not halfway on the cutting front yet! Delighted you kept and even increased the llamas. I’ll report back on the elephant!!! I use computer count – I think it is a UK thing and have always had to do that for magazines, etc, here. Anyway, a great job done. I hope you have a well-earned rest before pressing on with the wip.
   Best wishes,
   Mags

   Reply
9. 
   At 2:05 pm Donna said:

   WTG on cutting so much….although I have to say I have yet to have that problem – mind if I borrow a *few* of your words? I need to add 8k to my ms.

   THANK GOD you made the comment recently about having your characters have gratuitious sex for as long as they want. I’m taking this ms to a new level. LOL

   Reply
10. 
    At 2:49 pm Rhonda said:

    Bless your heart, Julie! Sounds like you did some major surgery. Recover soon!

    Reply
11. 
    At 3:41 pm Anna Lucia said:

    Good work, Julie!

    Reply
12. 
    At 4:43 pm Julie said:

    Ahhh, Donna, I didn’t say “gratuitous” sex. Sex always has to serve a purpose in terms of plot or character arc. But it can take a little bit longer sometimes.

    Thanks Sharon, Lis, Michelle, Mags, Donna, and Anna. I think the book is pacier and I haven’t actually lost anything vital. Sort of wish I’d done it awhile ago.

    Reply
13. 
    At 6:16 pm Sela said:

    The Slasher at work! Good job. Now rest!!

    Reply
14. 
    At 10:16 pm Donna said:

    LOL *ahem* my mistake.

    But hey, when you’ve restrained yourself from letting them have ANY, then finally giving them permission….it FEELS gratuitous.

    Seriously though I wanted them to get it on in the first place but the pub that requested it is FIRM on NO SEX. Sigh. Is it bad to say I just find that fundamentally wrong?

    BTW I noticed your new title for Rush. Are you happy with it?

    Reply
15. 
    At 6:47 am Jenna said:

    I pared down a mere 2K this weekend from my mss. I feel for you. Hugs. Lotsa hugs. And hopes you can do some kind of ‘lost scenes’ promotion when the book comes out

    Reply
16. At 9:54 pm Julie Cohen » I’m not so sure about the snails said:

    [...] I wrote this morning and then spent the afternoon doing laundry and reading Arthur and George by Julian Barnes. I’m enjoying the book thoroughly; it’s a novel based on the life of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and one particular incident where he sought to clear the name of a wrongly-accused man. It hits on several of my (obsessive) interests: Doyle (the creator of Sherlock Holmes), Victorian England, and 19th-century spiritualism. Originally I had quite a bit of stuff about the history of spiritualism in my novel Spirit Willing, Flesh Weak, but I had to cut it for the sake of pacing, and I’m wondering, inspired by Barnes, if I could use it in another, wholly different type of story. The wheels are turning, though when I’d have time to write that book, I have no idea. [...]

    Reply
17. At 7:40 am Julie Cohen » Spirit Willing sale said:

    [...] I shaved off 30K in a weekend, sent it off, and they made an offer within a few weeks. A US publisher, meanwhile, was putting together an offer, but Teresa and I decided that Headline were the best place for my career. I’m very excited to be working with them and can’t wait to write my next book for them, which should be another funny, sexy romance. Posted by Julie @ 7:37 am | writing   « disillusionment [...]

    Reply