Scrivener and the Editing Process

I’ve stumbled across two fantastic blog posts over the last couple of days – both about Scrivener’s place in the editing process.

David Hewson’s post argues the case for dumping Scrivener and using Word; Jamie Todd Rubin’s post describes how he manages edits in Scrivener.

I think both cases are valid: David’s is argued from the point of view that editors will invariably use Word; Jamie’s from the point of view of someone who understands this, but would rather manage the whole process in Scrivener.

The example Jamie cites is for a 12 scene work; his process of copying from Word into Scrivener seems viable for a work of this size. David’s example has over 100 scenes and I wouldn’t want to be copying and pasting between the applications for a work of that magnitude.

What do you think about these two different approaches to the editing process? What do you do? Please feel free to leave a comment.

I’m curating a whole host of Scrivener-related resources here. Please pop by and take a look.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.

2 thoughts on “Scrivener and the Editing Process

  1. Hi,

    I used StoryMill, Scrivener, Word, Pages…

    In my opinion, a word processing is like a typewriter : you need to manage all of your documents on your office, your notebooks, etc.
    StoryMill or Scrivener is like having all your office in your hands.

    I’am happy with Scrivener !



  2. I have Scrivener but I always seem to go back to Word. I want to love Scrivener, but I have to agree that Word is more comfortable and what I’m used to. It was great to read two sides, pros and cons. All that cutting and pasting is familiar, and one of the reasons I prefer Word. I write, but I am also an editor and work in Word with authors, so I understand both sides.

Comments are closed.