Overwriting

Michael Anderson

Because good writers can pre edit what is released it gives the impression that everything a good writer writes is good — but that is not the case. Even the best writers I know write a lot of average songs for every good one. I have heard plenty of so-so songs from great writers.

So what does that mean to the rest of us who may not be as good as the best writers? Or, what if we are as good but haven't learned that degree of critical self-editing?

From the time I started in this business I have heard how important the rewriting process is to writing - there is an old music publisher saying that goes something like "Good songs aren't written, they are rewritten."

But I wonder if what they mean could also be described as "overwritten" — meaning writing enough material so that you have to edit it down to the very best in order to fit into the paradigm of the form you are writing for?

For instance, if you are writing a Pop song in a two verse / chorus / bridge form, why not write as many verses as you can and just keep the best two? Or even take the best rhyming lines and combine those?

In fact, I have been working with my students in doing just that. An almost stream of conscious, "get it all down on paper" approach that is then edited to just the best.

It is very hard to switch back and forth when you are writing between the creative flow and critical analysis - to over think it when you are writing that initial run will almost always cut off the flow. That is why co writing can work well - one in the flow — one editing as they go along.

With my students I am finding it much better to edit from sprawling roughs — and they seem to find it easier to just let it rip and worry about looking critically at the material later. Some people feel they have to think of something great before they write it down — so they stare at a blank page until they feel too intimidated to write anything. "Writers block" they think, when it is actually fear.

If you have ever gone into "The Artist Way" you have a valuable tool in the morning pages to work from. Many of my students start songs with dreams that evolve into an organized thematically focused narrative only after the entire sequence is written out and they can look at from another perspective.

One of the advantages to the old school of analog writing was working on those really long yellow legal pads — they gave you a lot of room to stretch out and somehow felt very free in how much you could ramble and flow. I am sure word processors can function the same way — but the page on a computer screen can seem endless — something about the parameters of an analog page is comforting and gives you something to shoot for and work within.

So I have been encouraging my students to write it all out — don't fill in the blank of a couple verses and a chorus and call it a song — overwrite — give your inner editor a lot of source material to work with. There is no shortage of creativity — it is an endless supply - you don't have to ration it out like a precious natural resource - the more you dig, the more likely you will find gold in the stuff.

Then you get to the real editing stage. I have found that many times with my students when they write more they may have even focused on an idea within the context they had thought was the main idea, but in looking over their material we will find another idea that may even be stronger — a hook that went unnoticed — a title that was there all the time — an idea that was missed.

We don't always know what our best stuff is. That is why, if you are limiting what you write to the immediate form (Pop song form for example), you may inadvertently self censor out a gem because you weren't looking for it. Better to get it down and have it there to look at fresh, in the light of day, later.

As songwriters, we owe it to the listener to give our very best and use our self-editing abilities to focus material we present. A listener may not be able to tell us technically why something isn't working, but they feel it — they know. When we focus what we present — and 10% seems like a realistic estimate — more work for us means a more meaningful experience for the listener.

And when we give ourselves choices in our writing, variations of a theme, options for development, and stream of conscious possibilities we hadn't preconceived — we run the actual risk of writing something unexpectedly good.