Message Board Topic 12/27

[Comsie]

When an author truly pours their heart and soul into a story, it can be really difficult for them to just hand the manuscript over to someone else to bluntly tell them what's 'wrong' with it...and then have them fix it for them. Editors, they're called. I mean...this is your BABY, right? Imagine if you had a child, and had to go to a parent teacher conference at the school...and had to have a teacher tell you how 'screwed up' your son or daughter was? Hehehe, it's just not happening! You'd be ready to strangle somebody for even suggesting that what you created was 'flawed' in some way.

 

Then again, there are many authors who simply write in the moment, and take a lot of comfort in the safety net that having a separate editor provides. Someone who can really help and provide some true insight and constructive criticism on their work before being embarrassed in front of a much larger audience.

 

But...how do you find an editor that can truly help you express YOUR vision without changing little things here and there to suit their tastes instead? It can be hard to figure these things out sometimes, because not every writer/editor match up works. There's a balance that has to be maintained. A relationship that has to be developed.

 

So what do you guys think? Should authors look for a separate editor to help them with their work? Or should they do it themselves? Only the author knows what he wants to see on the page. But how can an author correct his own mistakes without help? Sometimes it takes an objective eye to make it right. And...how would someone go about finding an editor that suits them to a tee? Whatever your thoughts are...let us know!

[Graeme]

When an author truly pours their heart and soul into a story, it can be really difficult for them to just hand the manuscript over to someone else to bluntly tell them what's 'wrong' with it...and then have them fix it for them. Editors, they're called. I mean...this is your BABY, right? Imagine if you had a child, and had to go to a parent teacher conference at the school...and had to have a teacher tell you how 'screwed up' your son or daughter was? Hehehe, it's just not happening! You'd be ready to strangle somebody for even suggesting that what you created was 'flawed' in some way.

If the author truly believes that what they've created isn't flawed, they shouldn't be sending it to an editor. I also think they should probably see a psychiatrist or an optometrist, too, but that's another story

 

Then again, there are many authors who simply write in the moment, and take a lot of comfort in the safety net that having a separate editor provides. Someone who can really help and provide some true insight and constructive criticism on their work before being embarrassed in front of a much larger audience.

I'm definitely in the camp of taking comfort from the safety net

 

But...how do you find an editor that can truly help you express YOUR vision without changing little things here and there to suit their tastes instead? It can be hard to figure these things out sometimes, because not every writer/editor match up works. There's a balance that has to be maintained. A relationship that has to be developed.

It's not the job of an editor to change things "to suit their tastes". Editors can only suggest. Of course, if an author rejects most of the editor's suggestions, then that's probably an example where the writer/editor match up isn't working. An author needs to trust their editor's judgement. They can disagree and discuss particular points, but most of the time the editor's changes should have the author nodding their head thoughtfully.

 

So what do you guys think? Should authors look for a separate editor to help them with their work? Or should they do it themselves? Only the author knows what he wants to see on the page. But how can an author correct his own mistakes without help? Sometimes it takes an objective eye to make it right. And...how would someone go about finding an editor that suits them to a tee? Whatever your thoughts are...let us know!

I've highlighted what I consider to be the main problem with an author editing their own work. Not only are they the only one who knows what they want to see on the page, all too often they see what they expect to see on the page, and not what they've actually written. I don't know how many times I've read something I've written, only to have an outside eye point out a typo. My eye was reading what was supposed to be there, not what was actually there.

 

An exceptional author could also edit their own work, but that outside, fresh eye, with no preconceptions of what's supposed to be there, can see things that the author can't. This is why top competitors in almost any sport use an outside eye to coach them. It's not saying that they aren't capable of doing the job -- it's because they can't see what they're doing wrong because they're doing it and can't step outside themselves to observe and critique what they're doing.

 

An editor is an outside eye. The author sees the vision on what they want to say, and they interpret the words accordingly. The editor provides an outside eye to provide guidance on whether others will interpret the author's words in the way the author wants.

[David McLeod]

Graeme hasd covered the key points very well, I think. To reiterate and expand a little:

 

"It's not the job of an editor to change things 'to suit their tastes.' " There are canonical rules for grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, dialogue tags--the minutiae of writing. Editorial changes to these things should rarely be contested. On the other hand, we have writers and readers whose first language is USA or UK English, as well as writers and readers for whom English is a second language. Speech patterns (which affect sentence structure) vary. This can be the root of disagreement between writer and editor. Further, rules for grammar, and the language itself, evolve. How close to the leading edge of this evolution the author wants to be, and how far back from that edge the editor is, can be a source of disagreement. Both author and editor need to be aware of these things, and understand that there will be disagreement, even in the simplest things.

 

"...if an author rejects most of the editor's suggestions, then that's probably an example where the writer/editor match up isn't working." If the author rejects most of the editor's changes/suggestions despite explanation, the two need to evaluate the relationship. Is it a matter of style? Is the editor trying to change the author's voice? Is the editor trying to change things to suit his/her tastes/style? If so, then perhaps a new editor is needed. (As an editor, I hope that any author who found that true of my editing would tell me.) On the other hand, if the author rejects changes without explanation, and the editor finds that several hours work has been ignored, then perhaps the editor needs to terminate the relationship. (As a writer, I hope that any editor who found that true of me would tell me.)

 

"...all too often [authors] see what they expect to see on the page, and not what they've actually written." I received a comment a few days ago from a new reader who had found one of my recent stories. She was quite puzzled by some of the concepts and ideas in the story. I realized that having set the story in the same fantasy world as earlier stories, I'd assumed all readers would be familiar with that world. Bad assumption. An editor could have discovered that, and saved the reader puzzlement and me embarrasment. Further, despite spell- and grammar-checkers, and reading my stories aloud, word by word, I still am surprised by spelling and grammar errors.

 

Finally, having edited for several authors with widely different styles and skills, I realize that the editor's approach to each author must be different. One author writes stream of consciousness; my job is to help convert that into dialogue and narration. For one author, English is a second language, and his native speech patterns are wildly different from English. My job is simply to provide examples of USA-english sentence structure and patterns. And so on...

 

Thanks for starting this topic. I hope to see a lot of participation...'cause I need help as a writer and an editor.

[Dolores Esteban]

English is my second language. I don't write in German. I write in English since I find it easier to express my thoughts in English. Thus, I have to think about every sentence I put down. My English will never be perfect. In particular, punctuation is a big problem, I know. But the more I appreciate the readers who read and like my stories. I have not yet found an editor. I guess it's a tedious work for a native speaker of English to edit the stories of a non-native speaker of English.

 

I agree, though. An editor can help improve the story. The basics - grammar, punctuation etc. - as well as character development, flow of story etc. I think the editor should have an interest in the genre. I write historical fiction. An editor interested mainly in Science Fiction would not be the best choice, I think.

 

I put aside my stories for quite some time, months sometimes, before I read them again. It helps me to see the typos, mistakes and all the crap I put down.

 

[JamesSavik]

I am concentrated evil. It is more of a matter of finding an editor that can tolerate me.

[David McLeod]

I guess it's a tedious work for a native speaker of English to edit the stories of a non-native speaker of English.

 

I write historical fiction. An editor interested mainly in Science Fiction would not be the best choice, I think.

 

I put aside my stories for quite some time, months sometimes, before I read them again. It helps me to see the typos, mistakes and all the crap I put down.

 

 

It can be tedious, but it also can be extremely rewarding to edit the work of someone for whom English is a second language. I've learned some quite lyric sentence patterns, for example. I've also been forced to look up the meaning of words I thought I knew, only to find that I'd been using them incorrectly for years. That's a real treat!

 

Yes, an editor might do better if he/she were editing a favorite genre; however, I have found that if I edit something I'm not "interested in," I can focus more on editing and less on losing myself in the story. I've edited for one author who sucks me into the story. I become so engrossed, I don't see errors. I have to start at the end of his stories, and work backward, paragraph or sentence at a time, in order to check spelling/grammar. (By the way, reading a sentence backwards is a pre-Microsoft-Spell-Checker trick for catching spelling errors.)

 

The notion of putting a story aside, and then re-reading it months later is an excellent piece of advice. Approaching one's own stories as if they were new and unfamiliar reveals a lot about them.

 

Good discussion! Hope others will join.