How To Work With An Editor

[LJH]

You’ve retained, or you're lucky enough to have  an editor’s services free of charge and have received the edited version of your manuscript or article, or you are reviewing the work of a staff or freelance editor working for a publication you have submitted your content to. If you haven’t worked with an editor before, you may be disconcerted by the amount of editing that has been done. But whether you’re a novice or a veteran, these guidelines will help you have a productive relationship with the editor.

 

1. Respect Objectivity
An editor experiences your work dispassionately. Whether he or she simply engages with a decent manuscript or exults in the opportunity to help craft a classic, the editor is not emotionally involved. Take advantage of this fortunate fact by carefully considering any changes, comments, or suggestions the editor makes about your work

 

Is a character in a novel too good or too evil, or inconsistent in behavior or inadequately portrayed? Is your how-to book poorly organized or too sparse or too dense? Have you inserted yourself too obtrusively into an essay? An editor will let you know. Trust his or her outside perspective. An editor is the reader’s representative, and as he or she reacts to the content, so, likely, will your intended readership.

 

2. Cool Off
If something an editor does or says puts you off, do not respond immediately. Consider the substance, not the delivery, of the critique, then reply or accept the comment or the change with good grace or reject it with good grace based on its merits. Don’t be defensive. Good editors are generally diplomatic, but few people can avoid saying something the wrong way sometimes. (Editors should follow this advice from their end, too.)

 

3. Pick Your Battles
Editors reorganize syntax and replace words, among other tasks. Sometimes these are optional changes, made because the editor believes that another word or a recast sentence works better and sometimes because the original word is wrong or the original sentence is confusing or ungrammatical. In the former case, feel free to disagree, but understand that an editor may revise dozens or even hundreds of words or sentences from other clients and you’re wise to let most of them pass without comment.

 

That said, if you strongly believe in challenging a change, politely ask the editor about his or her rationale for making it. If the editor informs you that the revision corrects an error, thank him or her — perhaps before asking for clarification so that you can avoid repeating such mistakes — and move on. If a particular edit is discretionary but strongly advised, use your good judgment about accepting or rejecting it. (But see the next item’s second paragraph, too.)

 

4. Be Prepared to Rewrite
When you work with a developmental editor (BETA), he or she will likely recommend that you do a lot of rewriting. (If you thought you had submitted the final draft, you were naive.) You will likely be advised to do significant reorganizing of sections and recasting of sentences. The editor will suggest that you add new content and delete existing material.

 

A copy editor will send you a list of queries, or embed comments in the manuscript, or both. A good copy editor will usually understand what you were trying to say and will improve unclear or verbose content, but occasionally he or she may be unsure of your intent, or may ask you to confirm that the revision better reflects it. You are always welcome to revise a revision, and good editors are happy to know that they prompted you to come up with something better than both the original and their alteration.

 

5. Accept Fallibility
Even the best editors sometimes misunderstand material or make a mistake. If you catch an editor’s error, go ahead and gloat a little, but then politely inform the editor, who should appreciate receiving clarification or learning something new. Forbearance is especially important if the content is especially esoteric or technical.

 

Of course, if errors are numerous or you are otherwise dissatisfied with the editing, or the relationship becomes strained for some reason, try to resolve the difficulty calmly. If your efforts are not productive, check in with a staff editor’s manager and ask for advice or action, or inform the freelance editor that you will pay him or her for the work already done but have decided to retain the services of another editor.

 

Like the DailyWritingTips Facebook page if you haven't already done so!

Original Post: 5 Tips on How to Work with an Editor

[rustle]

Nice post, Louis.

 

But since I'm in a snarky mood    ,

 

1. The editor is always right.

2. When the editor is not right, refer to #1 above.

3. When I wrote it, disregard #1 & 2 above. The author is right.

4. When KC points out one of my errors, I meant to do that. (Hi Kase! *waves*)

 

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

Seriously, a few suggestions for an editor working with an author:

 

1. Be dispassionate and objective.

2. Be compassionate. Be nice.

3. Be informed and knowledgeable about your own craft.

4. Be conscientious.

5. Be supportive.

6. Be respectful.

 

Please, remember above all, this is not your story to tell. It's the author's. Help your author tell it as well as possible, and take a step back.

 

One more thing - if you don't love what you're doing when you edit a piece, maybe you shouldn't be doing it.

Edited September 6, 2013 by rustle

[joann414]

Both of you made great points.  Editors have a tedious job, dealing with the story, and the author.  Kudos to ya'll

[rec]

One criterion to add is to  make sure the author and editor understand the type of editing being done.  I categorize editing into four levels:

 

     Level 1: Alpha editing -- in which the author provides an outline and some text, and the editor decides if the concept is promising.

     Level 2: Beta editing -- in which the author has written a rough draft of  his/her story and the editors job  is to make sure the logic is okay, to identify missing or illogical parts, to suggest more or less development of characters, to look at structure, at style. At this stage, the editor should not be overly concerned with grammar, punctuation and spelling, and the author should recognize that another stage is necessary. 

     Level 3: Text editing -- in which the editor works on grammar, punctuation, spelling and word usage. The editor should realize that the story is essentially complete, only needing a polishing.  The author needs to realize that his or her story needs essentially to be finished and not expect beta-level comments. It is important that the roles on both sides are understood. It makes no sense to make major editing changes when serious restructuring is necessary. It is important, on the other hand, that the author not push his or her manuscript to this level when beta-type changes need to be made.

     Level 4:  Final editing -- in which the objective is to polish the story, to make all the punctuation work, to correct spelling, to correct any grammatical changes not picked up in the Text Editing stage. A final editor should not consider it his or her duty to make style changes at this stage.

 

     The boundaries between these stages obviously are not black and white, However, differences in the understanding of the editing level under consideration will aggravate the relationships between  the editor and the author. Indeed, I would doubt that the same editor should be used for each of these levels, except perhaps levels 1 and 2 as the concept is developed. In fact, I think the author should welcome additional eyes on the story, even when a text editor, for example, says that the story hasn't yet passed the beta stage or when a final editor decides that more text editing is required.

[thebrinkoftime]

On the editing side, I think there are also a few tips about how to go about editing.

 

Since I've been both a writer and an editor in real life, not just on GA, I have to sometimes sympathize with the author who reads his work when it comes back and something crucial has been changed to sound completely different. Often, the author feels it loses the point of what they were trying to say. When your work is changed and it does not reflect the direction you were trying to take it, it's hard to know why the editor did it if there isn't some sort of comment around the change.

 

So one thing I want to earnestly suggest to other editors is if your change is not along the lines of the completely factual grammatical error, you may want to comment on why you made the change and what you thought the author was going for. That way, if there is a quibble about whether to change it or not, the writer has good feedback on why. When a core kernal of what they were trying to express gets changed with no explanation, I think, sometimes authors feel like they've lost their work to the editor or maybe even more drastically, that the editor is on a ego trip. I've seen these nasty, strained relationships develop in the workaday world too often.

 

I often use a rubric while I'm editing. If it's a mispelled word, or there really should be a comma, I just make the change and note it with a highlighter. If it's a little less clear, I suggest alternatives. As the mistake gradually becomes more subjective, I error on the side of caution and more explanation of why I'm making the change so the writer can learn and stop making that mistake. Then there are things that comes along like this,

 

"He felt adrift on an ocean of spikes that were giving him heat from the unfair darkness around him."

 

Obviously the correct editing response is not to be snarky. Writing, "Ha ha ha, NO! What were you thinking?" helps no one. But, well, there it is. There is just so much wrong with that sentence. I understand that the author wanted to express that this character felt lost in a metaphor. Still, it is inelegant, murky language mired with mixed metaphors, an awkward flow and strange diction. (Notice how I kept my metaphor to a similar idea--mired and murky--while writing?)

 

But my idea of strange diction and your idea of strange diction might be very different. My idea of when a metaphor crossed the boundary to a mixed metaphor and yours might be different. There are even times (very rarely, but I admit they exist) where an author is intentionally mixing metaphors inelegantly in playful prose exercises. Words like "inelegant" and "murky" are trouble words, because even though that's how I feel, these are not precise, objective words. What that means to different people can vary widely. Where the change involves a less objective matter of taste, the more subjective, the more I comment to help the writer see why I think they need to change.

 

At least this is what I do in a new relationship. Older relationships tend to evolve to the point where they don't need as much of this and there's a trust there.

 

So in any case if I was writing an editing comment for that sentence above, I would say the following:

 

"Hmmm, I see that you're trying to communicate that he feels listless, lost or helpless somehow, but I'm not sure what your main point of comparison for that is. Does he feel like something on water might feel? More specifically, how is that painful? If indeed, you're trying to convey a sense of a lost bewildered soul, why do the feel the heat? Isn't that usually the case for someone who knows what the problem is and feels persecuted by it? Why is there heat in the darkness? Heat generally lights things up and gives you an idea of where you are because you can follow it. I realize you're trying to tie it in with the character feeling lost, thus the darkness, but the actual physical metaphor you are invoking is someone adrift on a hot place where they can't see around them but they know it feels like spikes. As you can imagine, this is pretty difficult to visualize. I recommend you simplify it and choose one motif (heat, darkness, pain or water) for your metaphor and use similar words for it. One way to do that for instance might be to say something like, 'He felt like a wounded sailor sent drifting into the ocean, a sea of dark night, with nothing but a plank to cling to', words like sailor, drift, ocean, plank, cling and sea reinforce the water motif and you add some darkness at the end without compromising the main metaphor. There are many other ways I think you could rewrite this better. Try them."

 

You may be like, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, hold on, Brink, I'm not going to write an essay on writing techniques for every single mistake!" Of course you're not.

 

You really only need to write a detailed explanation for something more subjective like that the first time. And like rec mentioned above, depending on the level of the text you are editing, you may not even need to do so.

 

If your editing jobs are anything like mine, however, the first time you spot a mistake like that will not be your last. So the next time you can write, "Oh dear, comparing a cat's purring to fire-extinguished fondue on an platter of lotus leaves is kind of bewildering. Remember what I said about mixing motifs up above. Consider that here and revise." And then the next time, you can just say, "How about comparing to something closer to home for the reader? Revise the metaphors." And the next time, "Awkward, the metaphors in this need revising." And the next, "Metaphor revision."

 

Because as noble as your intentions may be as an editor, and I sympathize with them, sometimes a writer will take it the wrong way. It will feel like you're saying their writing style, or ideas, or prose competence is a mistake and wrong, when you're all suggesting is it needs work to make it sparkle, like everything in life. When it comes to those more subjective ideas of editing if you feel like you may be stepping on a minefield, I suggest you try something like the method I've outlined above.

 

On the writer's side, I think I would like to say once again that even though what I was just talking about were more subjective ideas of what makes good writing, it is actually something of an illusion; they really aren't. There are some principles of writing that can always keep you on the right track, even if your purpose is to be innovative, surprising or subversive. So that subjective issue of metaphors I brought up above? It may be open to disagreement, but that doesn't mean we don't look at it with an objective eye.

 

That means that a good editor will not say, "Pish tosh, grand kibosh, I don't like this, so I'm going to change it." No, editors will always be looking at it with an eye to expressing your voice, thinking of what you want to say. There's no other motivation in our head other than to help your writing be the best it can be. One editor may really dislike anti-heroes, but if that's what your story is about, they will buckle down, take all their knowledge of about anti-heroes and use that to sharpen your story about an anti-hero. They won't try to make you change your character into a likable hero if that's not where you want the story to go, but a good editor sometimes may suggest potential problems with your ideas that you should take into account, because they're trying to get you on the right track, not trying to get you to write the type of hero they want.

 

I know I studied for years to become an editor, just like a professional at the very least practices their cooking a lot and refines it before trying to make a living out of it. Experience and knowledge gives a cook an idea of how to make food that their customers will enjoy. Even the subjective taste of whether food is actually considered good or not varies from person to person, the cook's knowledge of spices, ingredients, cooking methods and so on enables him to have an objective repertory to fall back on in order to create that subjective experience. In the same way, an editor's experience and knowledge will help you make stories that your readers will if not enjoy, at least find to be highly compelling. This experience and knowledge gives them an eye removed from personal issues of taste, the fads of the day or writing preferences. Good editors are following a grand tradition of extremely refined rules of literary criticism that has been developing for centuries, and allows them to get as close as possible to pure objectivity; they are not just saying change it because they are mean control freaks.

 

Sorry, I have a cold today, so if this coming out more muddled than usual, I'm taking the sniffle and cough defense.

Edited September 7, 2013 by thebrinkoftime

[rustle]

Rec, you've clarified well the editing process, though, as you say, the lines blur. Some authors self-edit part of the way. Others want a lot of help all along the way.

 

Different folks like doing different things when they edit. I don't really like to get involved with anything less than a completed story, because I lack an author's imagination. I can point out plot holes and inconsistencies, weaknesses and strengths along the way, but I usually read once, then I'm done, markups and all. Where I suggest a sentence to bridge a gap in thought, it's gratifying to see an author develop a thought better and more fully than my suggestion, and hand it back to me. It's great to see a character unfold on a second edit, or to visualize a setting that wasn't so clear the first time around. It makes final polishing feel new.

 

Editing is honestly a pain in the butt; however, a couple of things keep me coming back for more. One is having an author say he's learned something from me. Another is to see an author grow in his craft, and find his own voice and style. It's an unbelievable rush to build a relationship of trust and mutual respect with an author. It doesn't always happen, sadly, but it can put a fire in your belly when it does, and can surprise you with what you can learn about writing, editing, and life. There's not a person alive from whom we can't learn something.

[LJH]

I agree with all who posted here. I am in no doubt that the editors on GA are not hijacking their writers' works. If they are then they ought to be ashamed of themselves. In a previous post I mentioned that the author must rewrite rewrite rewrite. Editors can see a novice writer from a mile away and I will not sway in my opinion that novice writers must expect to be rejected by an editor or a publisher if his/her work is substandard. That is why we ask for an excerpt to be posted when they seek an editor.

 

Brink hits the nail on the head. Basically you can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

 

I have a fear.

 

It is reading a story I have edited to perfection only to find that most of the edits and suggestions were not carried out. This is the reason I will not read the submitted post by any author I edit.

 

Rec, your Breakdown of the editing cycle is worthy of a post on its own. There are a number of publishing houses that offer the full range of editing services for their fine authors. Sadly there are many publishers who do not. Especially here in rough n tumble South Africa. I do notice that authors thank their editors in the acknowledgement page of their novels, in most cases these are editors the author has hired.

 

Rustle. Rustle. Your post has merit. There is simply no excuse for bad manners so i shall stop being a harsh editor and allow my writers the freedom they do not deserve. LOL. Mind you, i find Mr. Grim's writing rather entertaining.

 

All authors and editors should remember this: Precision and clarity. None of my writers argue with those two words. LOL

[rec]

One thing that I have found useful for Text and Final Editing is an Author-Editor understanding to establish the writers' preferences, as each writer is different. As an editor I send a short, questionnaire-like document asking how to treat certain conventions, such as 'red, white, and blue' versus 'red, white and blue'--Oxford commas or American style. If a writer prefers one or the other, I want to respect his or her choice. Also I cover conventions like how to treat song or book titles, etc., as well as common spelling options, such as hardon or hard-on, t-shirt or T-shirt or tee shirt.

 

I also seek an understanding on how heavy the author wants the editing to be. Some authors bristle at changes and suggestions; others welcome them.

 

The Author-Editor understanding allows me to treat each author differently and not force my preferences on him or her.

 

If anyone wants a copy of it, please send me an e-mail (or email) at vwl1999 at lycos.com. For some reason, I can't upload the document in the PM option.  

[rustle]

"Rustle. Rustle. Your post has merit. There is simply no excuse for bad manners so i shall stop being a harsh editor and allow my writers the freedom they do not deserve. LOL. "

 

Oh, HELL no, I do NOT want to hear THIS.  rofl

 

Louis is NOT going to go soft on an author!

 

Whether you're writing or editing, though, ask yourselves what you want out of it all, what you're willing to put into it, and then pick up your pen.

Edited September 7, 2013 by rustle

[joann414]

I certainly hope than may authors as well as other editors are taking advantage of these posts.  Very enlightening and useful for both parties.  I know the first story I posted here, my editor pulled no punches.  I probably sent it back and forth four or five times, and still wanted them to do one last read over before publishing.  Letting an editor do his job is sometimes daunting, but if you can accept his knowledge, and suggestions with an open mind, you'll become a better and stronger writer.  Wearing your feelings on your sleeve is what you don't want to do when you ask someone to edit your story.  If a writer was perfect, he wouldn't need an editor.  I've learned so much, just by working as a beta, and watching the editor that is editing that story.  They spend a lot of time making the author's story more enjoyable and easier to read, and that comes from the whole editing process.  Nothing is harder to enjoy than a non-edited story that has glaring mistakes jumping at you every other sentence.  No matter how much you like the author on a personal level, you're doing them an injustice by not suggesting their need of an editor.

Glad all of your are taking time to share you knowledge and suggestions here.  Thank you! 

[Andy78]

I am the Lord thy Editor and I gift unto thee these Ten Commandments so that thou mayest learn how not to incur the wrath of thy Editor:

 

Thou shalt have no other editors before me (unless it is the Supreme Almighty Mr Louis Sir) 

 

Thou shalt make unto thee many graven images of thy Editor (unless thou plan to stick pins into it)

 

Thou shalt make thyself prostrate unto thy Editor

 

Remember thy English lessons as the Lord your Editor hath commanded thee

 

Honour thy Editor so that thy stories shalt be plentiful and free from errors

 

Thou shalt not submit any half-assed script unto thy Editor

 

Thou shalt not reject the suggestions of thy Editor without good reason

 

Thou shouldst expect to be beaten about the head by the Lord thy Editor for repeating the same mistakes over and over again

 

Thou shalt not submit a script to the Lord thy Editor that has not at least been put through the MS Word spellcheck (no matter how substandard and rubbish the Lord thy Editor knows the spellcheck to be)

 

Thou shalt read, read, read and read some more.  For it is only by reading the work of others that thou shalt enhance thy knowledge and please the Lord thy Editor.  If thou readest a story here on GA then thou shalt leave a review or thou willst surely incur the wrath of the Lord thy Editor.

 

 

I am the Lord thy Editor and I am a vengeful Editor.  Remember these commandments of the Lord thy Editor and thou shalt remain in the good graces of thy Editor.

 

Violate these commandments and the Lord thy Editor shalt surely allow your story to be filled with missing words, double negatives, incorrectly punctuated dialogue, and spelling mistakes.

 

Those who shalt follow these rules shalt come to know me as Andy.  Those who shalt violate these commandments willst come to know me by names that even Mr Louis Sir fears to utter.

 

In all seriousness though, just remember your basic English and you'll please your editor.

Edited September 10, 2013 by andy021278

[LJH]

Andy understands lol

[Kitt]

May I add one Andy?  It is actually a rephrase of something LJ wrote about not too long ago.

 

 

Thou shalt not use the words "that", "then", "just" or "so" excessively. And yes 87 times in a 5 page chapter is excessive.

 

 

See LJ?  People DO read your posts!

[knotme]

. . .

I have a fear.

 

It is reading a story I have edited to perfection only to find that most of the edits and suggestions were not carried out. This is the reason I will not read the submitted post by any author I edit.

. . .

LJH also posted ,

 

Before submitting the story or chapter to GA, you are required to get the approval from your editor/beta. The reason for this is simple: we offer a quality service and we expect only quality work. If your grammar and punctuation is not up to standard, then it is up to you to get it right, or as reasonably right as possible.

 

It follows that LJH passes on his right to approve for submittal, no?