Nib #8: First (Worst) Drafts

Ernest Hemingway put it best: “The first draft of anything is s--t."

Too many writers have never been taught this core fact of the writing life. But it *is* a fact. And by not teaching it, we set young writers up for frustration and failure.

First drafts are clunky, long-winded, loose, and full of outright mistakes. It’s not because writers are bad, but because writing itself is so hard. (See Nib #1.)

The defining quality of any first draft is not its concision, clarity, or vitality, but its *doneness.* Why? Because you can fix crap — you can’t fix nothing.

So don’t think about your first draft as *bad,* or even as a bad version of the finished product. Rather, think of it instead as a big slab of marble you just rolled into your sculpting studio. Only after it’s there can you get to work making it good.

Don’t be embarrassed if your first draft stinks. Of course it stinks — it’s a first draft!

Embrace that fact. Understand that most of what we mean when we say “good writing” is actually “good editing, revision, and re-writing.”

Make that leap and you’ll clear one of the biggest hurdles a young writer will ever face.

Until next week… keep writing!

April 25, 2025
Five quick tips for polishing your prose.
April 18, 2025
A good poem for Good Friday.
April 11, 2025
James Michael Curley's list of must-haves for public speakers (and speechwriters).
April 4, 2025
Two essays point to a generational opportunity for young writers.
March 28, 2025
Honest Abe was a great writer -- especially the one time he wasn't.
March 21, 2025
Not today, Satan.
March 14, 2025
The official Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s big speech before Congress last week offered the country not only a contrast of political visions, but of rhetorical strategies. Trump’s address was defined by — and indeed, succeeded on — the strength of its concrete details: specific programs cut, specific heroes lauded, specific private-sector investments announced (See Nib #61 ). Democratic Senator Elissa Slotkin’s nationally televised speech immediately following Trump was, too. But not obviously. Most of the specific details of the speech were biographical, in the first 100 words. After that, Slotkin glazed over issues with airbrushed generalities: “We need to bring down the price of things we spend the most money on…” “… change doesn’t need to be chaotic or make us less safe…” “Today’s world is deeply interconnected…” “We are a nation of strivers.” The climax of Slotkin’s speech was almost a parody of homogenized political banalities. The two things we need to overcome today’s challenges, according to Slotkin and her speechwriters: “Engaged citizens and principled leaders.” Woof. On the other hand, Democrats know this poll-tested pap won’t move the needle. So what’s really going on here? The most likely answer is what boxers call the “rope-a-dope.” That is, Slotkin’s — and by extension her party’s — plan here is to put up perfunctory, superficial resistance to bait Trump into overreaching or punching himself out. This is what Muhammed Ali famously did to George Foreman in 1974.
March 7, 2025
Tuesday night's address was a speechwriting masterclass in the power of specific detail.
February 28, 2025
How to use, and not use, intensifiers.
February 21, 2025
Why an old-school writing exercise may be more valuable than ever.
More Posts