AI for Developmental Editing

By James M. Jackson

We’ve been dealing with “Artificial Intelligence” for years. The term was created in 1956 at the Dartmouth Conference.[i] Ten years later, ELIZA, created by Joseph Weizenbaum at MIT, used an early natural language processing program (aka chatbot) to simulate a Rogerian psychotherapist![ii] In the 1970s and 1980s, we all started pressing our phones to indicate 1 for sales, 2 for service, etc. I started using a spellchecker in the mid 1980s.

The good old days.

Now, with massive and inexpensive computing power, AI is engaging in a much wider set of tasks. The software program ProWritingAid, which I have used for years, uses AI to check spelling and grammar. It also checks for a large variety of writing “issues” including writing style, sentence length and variety, readability grade, use of passive voice, adverb use, emotional tells, acronym use and consistency, paragraph complexity, and much more.

It not only spots “errors,” it suggests how to correct the “problem.” I use quotation marks because it is not always right. Often its software becomes confused by complexity, and misidentifies things like dialogue tags, doesn’t realize that a word like goin’ uses an apostrophe to signify the missing g rather than claiming my writing is flawed because I ended a quotation without starting it.

Although not perfect, it is very useful. So, when the ProWritingAid team introduced a Manuscript Analysis feature, I was interested to see how it would do. I recently finished Draft 3 of Niki Unleashed (Niki Undercover #2) and knew it still had a few structural problems. Before I tackled those, I asked the Manuscript Analysis to do its thing.

Its report was comprehensive, covering 37 pages. It began by telling me Niki Unleashed is a Thriller (Political Thriller) and provided a story overview and plot outline. The story overview (see below) is accurate, if not inspired. The plot outline caught the chief points but missed the subtlety.

With that start, I was skeptical about how helpful this would be.

But I changed my mind after reading the narrative elements section. It accurately reported three themes and motifs. Fortunately, there was more of this kind of analysis later in the report.

Then it stumbled with its analysis of potential readers that I did not find enlightening. Its “Similar Books” section explained the rationale for its choices, although I did not find the three choices compelling.

It listed characters, their role, character type, story presence, and offered for the top three a similar fictional character. The comparisons were not ones I would have made, but the explanations made sense. A table of contents section that listed narrative person and POV had no value to me.

The real value came in the next two sections.

It uncovered five Narrative Themes and concluded I had used two effectively. The other three themes were underdeveloped. It provided text references for its comments, and for the three “underdeveloped” themes provided suggestions to strengthen them. Two of the underdeveloped themes are underdeveloped because I do not consider them to be major themes. The third, Betrayal and Trust, does play a significant role in the story. Here is its suggestion:

Broad brush, but an accurate assessment and something I can improve in draft 4.

The Plot & Structure section is where ProWritingAid’s AI shined. It discussed seventeen areas in significant detail. Maybe it was trying to sugar-coat the pill, but it reported several things it thought I did well (a compelling premise, clever use of red herrings and suspense in the murder investigation, and fast-paced and action-packed narrative in the second half).

The greatest value was in the things it considered issues.

Several involved inconsistencies it found. While not all of them were actual inconsistencies, the fact it considered them problems means they are things I must clean up.

It was concerned about three plot points it didn’t think I had resolved or had not provided sufficient motivation to justify. (It was right).

Recall that it praised my pacing in the second half of the novel. Issues it highlighted in the first half were an overuse of internal monologue and lengthy explanations of procedures and technical details. Those issues slow the pace.

It also worried about “unclear and inconsistent states and threat levels” and “inconsistent tone and use of humor.” These are two facets of the same issue. One subplot has a different level of threat (personal relations and financial well-being) than the main plot (her life is on the line). While I don’t agree with its suggested solutions, it spotlighted a potential problem I will ask beta readers to express their opinions on.

On characters, it gave me positive marks for a complex and multifaceted protagonist, strong voice and authentic dialogue by the protagonist, and a realistic portrayal of the protagonist’s internal struggles and emotional journey.

It highlighted unclear motivations for two of the other characters—fair assessments, I think.

It also dinged me for “underdeveloped relationships and missing backstory of supporting characters.” This is book two of the series focused on the protagonist. The AI tool hasn’t read book 1, and it wanted more character development for supporting characters. Maybe I should include a few more snippets of backstory, but this isn’t a novel where everyone shares the spotlight and needs to change.

Setting: It praised the use of setting to create tension, but it wanted (depending on the criticism) both more and less detail. It faulted some of the legal procedures I used, as well as some of the FBI/ATF procedures. This isn’t a procedural, so I need to cut corners, but it is an interesting observation that I will think about.

This first use came free of additional cost with my ProWritingAid license. Each future use costs $50. It doesn’t replace a human editor, but I think I received $50 worth of value. My next draft will be stronger based on its findings.

Next month, I’ll talk about how I use ChatGPT to augment this ProWritingAid Manuscript Analysis.

Authors: what are your thoughts on using AI to help improve your stories?

Readers: Do you enjoy learning the behind-the-screen aspects of how we create our novels?

---

[i] https://home.dartmouth.edu/about/artificial-intelligence-ai-coined-dartmouth

[ii] https://www.csail.mit.edu/news/eliza-wins-peabody-award

James M. Jackson authors the Seamus McCree series. Full of mystery and suspense, these thrillers explore financial crimes, family relationships, and what happens when they mix. To learn more information about Jim and his books, check out his website, https://jamesmjackson.com. You can sign up for his newsletter (and get to read a free Seamus McCree short story).

 

When (2 + 2) is less than 4

 by James M. Jackson

I am starting the writing year facing two tasks I thoroughly enjoy and two I absolutely despise.

What I am looking forward to

I have been working on and off (actually, more off than on) creating a new series featuring Ashley Pendergast Prescott, who is initially an FBI undercover agent. My plan is to develop a three-book series (and if those do well, then more). In researching this blog, I was shocked to discover I had begun writing the first book, currently titled Niki Undercover, in early 2019. Just before Christmas this year, Jan finished her read through of that WIP, found a few typos and misplaced commas and pronounced it the best novel I have yet written. My next task is to listen to Niki Undercover one last time because when I listen, I always catch a problem or two that my eyes and Jan’s never found. It’s a fun task. I get to lie on the couch and listen to an AI voice tell me a story and giggle at its mispronunciations. Plus, when I am done, I can call the story complete. Well, almost—see below for the tasks I am not looking forward to.

I wrote the first draft of the second book in the Niki Undercover series (tentatively titled Niki Unleashed) in the spring of 2021 and completed the second draft in January 2022. Jan read it then, made some suggestions. The manuscript sat just shy of three years before I picked it up this past December and gave it a read through. It needs work, but between Jan’s comments and my recent notes, I am cranked to write the third draft—my second enjoyable task. Yes, it will be a formidable task, ripping away the parts that don’t work and creating a tighter, edgier plot. But I know what I want that story to do, and that is exciting.

What I am not looking forward to

After Jan’s read through of Niki Undercover, she said, “You really should try to get an agent for this. It’s the best thing I’ve read recently.” I tend to think whatever book I just finished is my best (even though during its creation, I was sure it sucked, and I should abandon it). Jan has never made a statement like that about anything I’ve written.

I had planned to self-publish the new series. I figured I would wait until later this year when I had the second novel in decent shape and a draft of the third novel complete. That way, I could start pre-orders for the second book at the same time I published the first.

And then Jan damned me with that great praise. As a result, the first dismal task I need to complete is to craft a synopsis for Niki Undercover. Even though I have created synopses that won publishing contracts, I claim zero expertise and one-hundred-percent dread. I’ll get it done; I know I will. But until I do, it’s like rolling Sisyphus’ rock up the hill while the Sword of Damocles dangles by that single thread over my head.

And then, when I get that sucker done as well as I can, I must accomplish my second dread-laden task: researching literary agents to find ones who might be interested in my novels. Sending out the actual emails (or filling in online forms) is drudgery, but I have no fear of rejection. If they all say no, I am back to my original plan of self-publishing. If one signs me on, I know I have another round or two of revisions ahead of me.

To keep sane, each day I will work on both enjoyable and apprehensible tasks. I’ll start with the stuff I abhor and then reward myself with work I want to do.

I hear there is an open betting line in Vegas about whether I can pull this off. What odds do you give me?

* * * * *

James M. Jackson authors the Seamus McCree series. Full of mystery and suspense, these thrillers explore financial crimes, family relationships, and what happens when they mix. To learn more information about Jim and his books, check out his website, https://jamesmjackson.com. You can sign up for his newsletter (and get to read a free Seamus McCree short story).

Some Simple Revision Suggestions by Susan Van Kirk

 Recently, I revised (over and over) my latest art center mystery, Death in a Ghostly Hue, and it reminded me of some easy fixes I use when revising my writing. Nothing technological. Pretty innovative twentieth century. When I write a rough draft, I use Novelize, and I edit with Microsoft Editor, so, yes, I do use my computer to move ever forward toward revision. But over the years, I’ve used the following simple revision ideas. Maybe they will give you some new thoughts.

I’m also optimistic because the before-and-after photos of my house remind me that I WILL get this manuscript ready for publication.

 

First, the road to revision begins with this:

This is my editor’s Christmas present reminding me that it’s only the first draft, and I shouldn’t cry.

Second, sometimes I write in my living room on the dining room table rather than in my office. When I do, these are the before-and-after photos—minus the empty wineglass—of my revision efforts:

These photos remind me that there will be an end to this revision. I will survive once again.

Third, I often print copies of the manuscript as I’m working on it. Then, I revise using paper copies. At my age, this helps my eyes considerably. And yes, I do recycle the paper. This is the latest pile from my novel revision over the past month.

Once the manuscript is done, I do my own first revisions with a red ink pen. (I just can’t stop being an English teacher.) I make the changes on my final edit copy of the manuscript, putting little sticky notes to remind me where I’ve changed things. This way, I don’t have to read completely back through every page. See the picture below:

As you can see, I ran through two entire pads of sticky notes. I have messy first drafts.

 Once I make these changes, I send the manuscript to four beta readers. Two of them are great at line edits, one is terrific when it comes to finding plot holes, and the fourth is the executive director of the local art center. Since this series is about an art center, she looks at the way I used artistic terminology so I won’t sound stupid. Hey, it works for me.

My beta readers like paper copies, and they use red pens and sticky notes too. As you can see, even after I’ve revised my first draft, they find lots of things to tell me.

 The next non-technological revision idea is a proofread using my daughter’s ruler from elementary school. Since she is now forty-seven, this ruler has been around for a while. Definitely not twenty-first century technology. However, I catch more errors when I look at my manuscript one line at a time, and this helps me focus exactly that way.

Finally, I do go back to technology and use the voice feedback on my computer to read the manuscript back to me. I find more errors this way since I use my hearing rather than my eyes to catch things. It also helps with dialogue. To find this Word voice that will read back your manuscript, go to the review tab at the top and click on it. Then, on the left side banner you’ll see “Read Aloud.” Click on “Read Aloud.” On the right upper part of the screen an arrow will come up to click on and start the reading of your manuscript. You can also pause it there.

 

So, once I’ve done these revision steps, I’m ready to send my manuscript off to my editor. Hope some of these will work for you. It may look like a lot of work, but I want to put out a quality product with as few errors as possible.