Page from World's End |
There
are all kinds of editors, good ones, bad ones, and many in between. A
good editor is one who will give you a run for your money. She will
not only correct all your grammar errors, but will question you on
every detail, find logical inconsistencies, hold your feet to the
fire. Odds are, she will write, “Show, don't tell!” somewhere on
your manuscript.
A
bad editor will not do anything at all. Increasingly, editors – who
are generally underpaid and overworked – simply don't want to put
any time or effort into a manuscript. Like a homeowner who doesn't
want to fix up a house before putting it on the market, they want to
publish a book “as is.”
Writers may think such a "hands off" approach is sheer heaven. After all, editors who do nothing are great for an author's ego. But, believe it or not, there are errors in your manuscript – of internal logic, of grammar, and of sense. There always are. Trust me, you don't want your readers (or reviewers) to point out your mistakes.
Writers may think such a "hands off" approach is sheer heaven. After all, editors who do nothing are great for an author's ego. But, believe it or not, there are errors in your manuscript – of internal logic, of grammar, and of sense. There always are. Trust me, you don't want your readers (or reviewers) to point out your mistakes.
Good
editors are a dying breed, but great editors – ah, those are the
ghosts of the past. A great editor not only gives his authors a run
for their money, he brings out the best in them. A great editor puts
his own ego aside (a rarity), and instead of adhering to a rule book
(“Show, don't tell,” “Only one POV allowed”), follows the
author's lead. Great authors break the rules, and great editors let
them.
I
had a good editor at RH. She forced me to examine everything in my
manuscript – every chapter, every paragraph, every sentence, every
word, every punctuation mark. I fought her every step of the way -
and sometimes I was right. When I caved in to her insistence on
following the rule book it robbed something from my story. But, more
often than not, she was right. The trick to working with her was to
understand what she was getting at, and then adjust my manuscript –
slightly. In editing my first book - and this will always haunt me -
I deleted too much. This is a common mistake for first-time authors.
They throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I
have learned through trial and error that the best way to work with
editors is to walk the middle path. When they say “Jump,” don't
ask “How high?” Don't slavishly follow every
suggestion. Use your judgment.
On the other hand, don't, don't, don't tell them to sod-off – even mentally. They may be right. Take a step back from your manuscript, take a deep breath, and then exercise your skill as a writer. Make your manuscript shine as only you can – with their guidance. If the editor is good, the final product will be well worth it.
On the other hand, don't, don't, don't tell them to sod-off – even mentally. They may be right. Take a step back from your manuscript, take a deep breath, and then exercise your skill as a writer. Make your manuscript shine as only you can – with their guidance. If the editor is good, the final product will be well worth it.
Along these lines (and good for a laugh):
Rejections of Famous Authors: Gertrude Stein
No, don't trust them. I remember how I got the final proofreading printout of "Corous Sacrum" from out publisher, amended a couple of things, went to my source file to adapt it to the printout and was bewildered to find that many of my amendments were already in the file. Had I done it when I was asleep or what? Then, slowly, it dawned on me that my subconscious memory had simply undone many of the editor's rephrasings.
ReplyDeleteGreat advice. I love it when I get a good editor, someone who helps me learn but also challenges me. I had one edit recently that just seemed to pull my voice out of the writing. I am still on the search for a great editor.
ReplyDelete