Blogger: Janet Kobobel Grant
Last week I sang editors’ praises, saying these individuals need to have a bigger voice in publishing, serving the much-needed role of tastemakers and gatekeepers. Today I want to tell you why I don’t like editors, the other side of the coin, as it were.
My complaint is simple. Being edited stings.
I’ve written a number of books, and I seldom looked at an editor’s work on my manuscript and felt good about what I saw. I took umbrage when I would note words changed, sentences rearranged, and darlings murdered–yes, murdered. The experience was traumatic.
Looking back, I realize I was hyper-sensitive, and my work generally was served well by the editors. But I’ve been recalling that stinging sensation as I’ve contemplated the role editors play in the publishing process, or don’t play, as some self-published writers bypass them.
I don’t think hiring someone who cleans up your spelling, grammar and punctuation is the same as letting your work pass through the serious eye of a content editor. Such an editor looks at a work’s flow, its structure, if the theme threads well through the manuscript, if transitions are in place, if the voice remains true or whether the reader is jarred by a voice shift, if details are unclear, if permissions and releases have been acquired, if the best words are put to their correct use, if the author has a penchant to overuse certain words or sentence structure, if the beginning is intriguing, if the ending is satisfying, if the middle sustains the reader’s interest, etc.
There is no substitute for an editor with a good eye and a strong sensibility for what a manuscript can be.
But there’s also nothing so upsetting as an editor who oversteps his or her bounds. These individuals lack finesse. I suspect they secretly long to be writers. And your manuscript is the perfect place to show off those writing skills. I remember one of my client’s manuscripts suffering at the hands of such an editor, who decided to change the protagonist’s signature clothing and appearance–in the third book of a series. Hell-o, I don’t think so.
Of course, it’s not always so easy to know when an editor has overstepped those boundaries, is it? Here are a few guidelines that help the writer, who can’t see clearly what is improved and what is over-edited:
- Has the editor rewritten rather than edited? For one of my projects, the editor added his illustrations to my book. That is overstepping. If my nonfiction book needs an illustration, ask me to provide one; don’t provide one for me.
- Words that aren’t part of your vocabulary are inserted. Remember that every change the editor makes likely pinpoints a problem in your manuscript. Maybe you used the same word too often. Maybe the word you chose wasn’t quite right.
- The editor made adjustments that change what you intended to say. Sometimes an editor guesses wrong about what you were trying to communicate. Even if the correction changes your intended meaning, the editing points out that you weren’t clear.
- The editor insists that his or her changes remain when you point out concerns about them. A good editor will respond with something like, “I see why my change doesn’t work, but the problem still remains. How would you solve it?” An editor’s work should pinpoint problems, but the editor doesn’t always have the best solution. That best solution resides within the author.
What do you think about my view of editors? What contributions have editors made to your writing? Has your work suffered at the hands of an overly zealous editor? How did you resolve the situation?
Drawing for a Kindle Fire!
We want to encourage our readers to subscribe to our blog so that it comes to you automatically every time we post. Through April 30th, everyone who subscribes to our blog via email or RSS will be entered in our drawing for a Kindle Fire. If you’re already subscribed, you’re already entered in the drawing. We’ll do the drawing in the first week of May and announce the winner on the blog. Contest is open to everyone in the United States and Canada, Books & Such clients included.
I have the unique perspective of being an editor and a writer. I have edited newspaper articles, medical news, and curriculum, so it’s not the same thing as book editing, but you still can face similar challenges. It can be very difficult, but as an editor, you have to exercise that control and walk a fine line between rewriting and correcting grammatical errors. Let’s face it; editing is often subjective (unless you are changing something that’s grammatically wrong). But it’s hard in your own mind to figure out if something sounds bad because it’s poor writing or sounds bad because YOU would write it differently.
Always a balancing act.
As a writer, I would not like an editor changing something just because he/she wouldn’t write it that way. So I try to stick to that rule as an editor.
That’s a good rule to follow.
Lindsay,
I agree, “editing is often subjective.” How wonderful you consider editing a balancing act. It takes unusual skill and incredible finesse to come alongside someone to help them become a better writer! Sounds like you enjoy your work.
Kate, I really do enjoy my work. I love helping others improve their writing. Of course, I love writing too! 🙂
Helpful article. I agree that content editing is essential and no author should ever bypass it. But it’s so hard to know if you’re in good hands, or if the suggestions are on target. Appreciate the tips!
Your welcome, Mira.
I meant you’re welcome. Talk about needing editing…
🙂
I haven’t experienced “professional” editing yet. Two of my friends who are published authors have critiqued a finished manuscript, which I really appreciated. One of my friends offered very detailed suggestions, and the other some content advice. Although they each have written several books, I never felt they were trying to change my work to reflect their style.
I appreciate the guideline tips and look forward to working with a good editor in the future. Thanks Janet for sharing some of your personal experiences!
Kate, I’m glad your “editing” experience has been positive so far. I’m at a writers conference today and talked to an unpublished author who had received such diverse feedback from editors about his manuscript that he didn’t know what changes he should make and what would change his voice and even his ultimate purpose in writing. poor soul was lost. I think I better point him to my post!
Oh boy! I’ve had that one. Not just with my critiques, but from contest judges. I think that’s a good time to stick with your own voice. If one obviously likes it, then maybe it’s best to be true to your own style there. Right? Of course, I’m not published so y’all can take my thoughts with a grain of salt :o).
So far, my writing has passed through editors I know and trust, so I think editors are fabulous. However, that state of editor bliss may well alter the day I receive a harsh edit from an faceless editor I’ve never met. Time will tell. 🙂
I found even knowing the editor doesn’t take away the sting from a vigorously edited–or over-edited–manuscript. That can actually make it harder to work through what you agree to and what you don’t because it can feel as if the relationship might be hanging in the balance.
The pain of editing is also tempered (or not) by your opinion of the editor. I had my first chapter edited (paid) by someone who was highly recommended, had outstanding credentials and who impresssed me with her professionalism up front. I found her edits relatively easy to take. On the other hand, when that person in the writer’s group who kind of bugs you makes a suggestion, it can be much harder to swallow.
Of course, the real lesson is that the impressive professional isn’t always going to be right and the annoying novice isn’t always going to be wrong. I’m still learning to discern . . .
Sarah, discernment is a never-ending battle. Another person I talked to here at the writers conference had been told she shouldn’t start her nonfiction book with a story. When she and I talked about her project, I suggested that perhaps the editor’s advice had a grain of truth in it but not the whole truth. The manuscript could benefit from starting with a story but not the story the author had used. Figuring this stuff out is tough. When I write, I try to look at the critique as having pinpointed a problem. The solution offered might not be correct, but if I see the problem, I’m likely to–eventually–find the solution.
This is a fabulous article, because it provides two sides to the story. I have to admit, I’ve been happy with my editors. The only time I wasn’t, was when an editor changed the title of one of my articles that altered the meaning of it. It actually made it seem I held a position opposite from the point I was making.
I don’t know if you’re going to address this at all, but I sometimes hear from fellow writers that they’ve paid to have their work edited, but when I’ve read it, I’ve found significant grammatical and/or continuity issues. How is a writer to know if an editor is worth his salt?
Thanks for the wonderful post.
Good question, Cheryl. I’ve seen writers who have had 1 or 2 books published and then hung out their editor shingle. A writer doth not an editor make. Those are two different tasks with two different skill sets. If I were looking to hire an editor, I would ask that person if I could talk to a couple of people whose work she had edited and I would ask her to edit a few pages of my work. If you had a published piece, it would be great to give the person a few of the first pages of the unedited manuscript and then compare them to the first editor’s work. Don’t be afraid to test out the person you’re going to pay several hundreds of dollars.
Fabulous post!
Thank you for this wonderful article Janet! I will definitely keep these in mind when I finally have an opportunity to submit my works to a professional editor…which will hopefully be happening within this calendar year.
When I return my clients’ manuscripts, I always remind them that my suggestions are just that. They are the authors and have complete control of how they want the book to be. I’m also very careful not to mess with their voices. When I change something, I give reasons why it needs to be changed and specific examples. The client doesn’t need to use my words, but I believe the examples make the reasons more clear.
I’ve found that I can tell who’s going to be successful by how easy they are to work with and how much effort they put into learning why the changes need to take place.
That being said, I love being edited. One editor found a plot hole I never would have seen. I was able to fix it before my agent or publisher saw the manuscript. Whew! The other editor respected the purpose behind my writing and always asked questions to make sure she didn’t change my meaning. Elaine Wright Colvin once said during an OCW keynote that the purpose of editing was not to make sure the writer is understood, but to make sure the write is not MISunderstood.
I like that!
Christina, these are the practices of a good editor. I especially like that you tell why you’ve made certain changes or suggestions.
I’ve only had one novel published, so my experience level is low, but it is a MUCH better book because of the editing. In fact, I believe I would be embarrassed by the book now, if it hadn’t been edited. Grammatically there were few errors, it was strengthening the characters and plot suggestions that made all the difference. The second and third books I’ve written are better crafted for having worked with a strong, discerning editor.
Janet, I think you’ve achieved a fair balance in these two posts. Editors, like lawyers, doctors, teachers, and even agents, come in roughly two categories: good and bad. There are some that are a mixture of the two, but eventually most can be divided this way. Fortunately, so far I’ve only had good ones (crossing fingers as I type).
I got my introduction to “don’t rewrite the blooming thing” when reviewing professional papers for medical journals. I quickly learned that what was required was telling the author how to do it better, not doing it myself. Hard to do, but it makes me appreciate a good editor now.
Richard, I know you’re a talented guy, but typing and crossing your fingers is downright genius. You make a good point about the good and the bad. And remembering not to rewrite the blooming thing is a great guideline for editors and for those who feel over-edited.
Since I haven’t worked with editors, I can only speak to critiquers, who have some of the same strengths and pitfalls. I cannot imagine having completed my manuscript without them. However, yes, I felt sometimes my voice being stepped on, or my ideas weren’t understood. In some cases, I just ignored the suggestion–you can do that with critiquers–In others, like you said, it prompted me to clarify what the critiquer obviously misunderstood. Having benefitted so much from this process, I hesitate to self-publish. I like the idea of others (who are not already in my mind) seeing the manuscript as the reader would and helping me communicate my ideas more accurately. Thanks for the list of things to look out for!
That’s so true about ignoring critiquers. But those bits of advice do tend to nag at one even when you try to dismiss them.
Yes. Sometimes they do. And sometimes it’s for a reason. There have been those that nag me … so finally I relent, realizing they were right.
Most editors have been helpful, but years ago when I wrote feature articles for a newspaper they got a new editor who shortened some things by cutting the second half of a sentence in one paragraph and up through the first half of a sentence in the next paragraph so the resulting sentence was gibberish. She also changed some phrases to sound like African-American dialect. Fortunately most people seldom look at bylines so my neighbors didn’t think I’d gone crazy.
Wow. Scary. Tell me the editor didn’t last long.
That was years ago and I stopped writing for them so I’m not sure how long she lasted.
I think you know you’ve got the right editor when their edits only make your work stronger, and don’t take away from the overall mission of your story.
I consider myself blessed to have an agent who is also an editor, so he saw the potential in my story and knew how to maximize it without changing the flow. Good editing has only made my writing stronger.
But discernment is key. I like editors who “get” my work, so the rapport is cemented BEFORE the serious editing begins.
Good post! I keep hoping I’ll win that Kindle fire!
Best of luck with the Fire, Heather. I personally hope you have lots of competition for it.
My content edits came from my awesome agent–and former editor–Rachelle Gardner. She really knows her stuff and gave me spot-on advice. While it wasn’t easy to hear that three-quarters of my story needed to be ditched and rewritten, Rachelle was right. I worked hard to implement her suggestions, and she sold the resulting story.
I’ve only been through professional copyedits once so far, and the experience was awesome. The editor assigned my debut novel did a wonderful job catching places where things were unclear, pointing out repetitions I’d missed, etc., but she left making the actual changes to me. I admire and appreciate the way she respected my voice. I had a few surprises from the proofreader. I agreed with most of them, but my publisher was willing to make changes in order to address a couple of things that didn’t sit well with me.
I’m grateful to the many who helped make my story shine, even if the process of getting it to that point stung a bit at times.
I suppose we should mention that sometimes proofreaders can dip into editing while they’re reading. I confess that my personal experience is that they are proofreaders for a reason, if you know what I mean.
Janet,
I really like how you illustrated how some editors cross the boundary between between editor and writer wannabe. The editor’s job, as you demonstrated, is to point out where the writing is flawed or could be strengthened. The writer is the one who should revise the writing. An editor’s feedback may be helpful (sometimes not), but when an editor goes from helpful to controlling, red flags should go up.
Thank you for this excellent blog.
Early in my business career I wrote my first press release and proudly handed it our Public Relations contact. In a huff he crossed off the word “since” and replaced it with “because.” His disdain over my word choice was unmistakeable.
Wanting to learn, I politely asked for an explanation. He glared at me like I was an uneducated idiot. Then I think he growled. I still don’t know why he made that edit.
I try to keep this in mind whenever I edit or critique someone’s work, especially if they are present.
I certainly don’t want them to be scarred by my words — and talking about me three decades later!
Peter, what an example of not only the power of words but also the power of disdain.
Janet, this is a wonderful column. Speaking here as a professional editor, I am sensitive to most of these considerations every working day.
A word I have not seen (did not yet scan the companion column) is “query”——I use quote marks because I cannot italicize here. I learned many years ago that it works better to raise questions and point out possibilities than to impose changes. It is a luxury that when we do this electronically, the author can simply “reject” the change or overrule it with a third option.
I try to present an overabundance of riches with queries that offer more than one alternative; in fact, I try to overdo that practice, in fact. The poor author may feel overwhelmed with decisions, so I also suggest reading aloud. The whole project will benefit from this habit, but especially in spots, considering changes, to read them over so you can hear them helps you “taste” the various options: the connotations, the tone, how well a word or phrase harmonizes with narrative or the character’s voice speaking, etc.
Ultimately, these decisions are not rightly mine to make. I’m there to help the writer improve the project, to polish and complete it. Now and again there are exceptions: In a nonfiction piece today, I am repeatedly replacing “due to the fact that” with “because.” It still falls under my blanket guideline that the author is free to overrule my suggestions, but in this case the author would be advised not to. My deeper hope is that the interaction will enable the writer to make better decisions before submitting a draft to be edited; if it’s fixed in the process, that’s okay as well.
Finally (I do go on; sorry), Janet, I liked your comment pointing out that some of us are “proofreaders for a reason”; I know exactly what you mean. Those without good editorial judgment should not edit until they are ready or until they are asked. However, I have also come across many errors on jobs I have contracted to proofread and helped writers work their way to a better piece of writing——while I move on, cleaning up jots and tittles. My general rule is that, no matter how light the job I have been asked to do, when I spot a problem, it’s my duty to point it out and offer help, even if I can’t (allow myself to) fix it.
My own cardinal rule is to stress that my work is tentative, amounting to suggestions, and that the writer is in charge. The writer’s excellent job in the end is where I derive my own satisfaction.
(In fact, I also need editing, in fact.)
“due to the fact that” is one of my pet peeves I wouldn’t be able to keep my itchy fingers off of.
I well remember the sting of seeing my first edit! Surely it wasn’t that bad, was it? Yep, it was.
Since I had a relationship with my editor outside of this work, I knew I could trust her. With that in mind, and putting aside my pride, I read through the changes she suggested. I eventually agreed with all but one (we still banter if anyone knows the word ‘presage’ anymore; I’m keeping it!).
I think trust is the biggest factor in working with an editor. It’s hard to find good ones, but when you’re sure that person is it, we need to listen. I know my editor only wanted my work to be the best possible, and to break my nasty habit of writing in passive voice.
Ann, it’s so true that once you know you have an editor you can trust, you can rest in their judgment. It!s a lovely thing.