• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

On NOT Hiring an Editor (Interview)

Status
Not open for further replies.

GeekDavid

Auror
Speaking of editing FAIL:
"Jesus" has been misspelled on official Vatican issued medals designed to celebrate the one year anniversary of Pope Francis' installation as head of the Catholic Church.

It in an embarrassing incident for the Catholic Church with the Vatican being forced to withdraw thousands of official papal medals from sale after the misspelling of Jesus' name was found recently.

The medals were designed to help the Catholic Church mark the first year of Pope Francis' pontificate. The medals, which were produced in gold, silver and bronze, contained a Latin inscription around the edge, but referred to Jesus as "Lesus."

Jesus Misspelled by Vatican: Embarrassment for Catholic Church as Special Medals to Celebrate Pope Francis' Anniversary as Pontiff Withdrawn

Now that's an embarrassing goof.
 

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
I find this topic interesting and I apparently missed something. I recently read Brian's stance on this issue over at Chilari's blog. I said that I agreed with a lot of what was said, but didn't think it all completely rang true for me. So Chilari offered for me to write a counter-argument in a future guest post. I'll be working on that soon.

One thing I'd like to point out is that I've noticed around here and other writing communities that writers don't want to be told "this way is the only way." If a way works for a particular person, it's good to say, "Hey, this worked for me and here's why." Saying that another person's way is wrong or ill-informed is a sure-fire way to start a heated argument. For me I say, "I think things are this way." If someone disagrees I say "OK. I guess we disagree about that" and move on. If it's a topic that I think we can have a good, constructive discussion on, then I'll state my case the best I can. When it seems that neither side is budging, that's when it's time to just say, "Well, toMAYto, toMAto. Let's call the whole thing off."

I do think there's merit to hiring a professional editor. Especially if you're planning to self-publish. However, I don't think it's an absolute must. Writers should teach themselves editing skills that way they don't have to rely so much on other people to make their work shine. So my advice would be if you don't plan to hire an editor or at least have others you trust look over your work, then you should study editing extensively and put that in your "writer's tool belt." The best way to learn is by writing and editing. Learn by doing. But it would be good to see what the standard in the industry is held up to be or at least find a writer's book you think is clean and well edited. Aim for that.

I'll have more to say on Chilari's blog. That's not a cheap plug because it's not my blog, right? ;)
 
Last edited:

Chilari

Staff
Moderator
A professional content editor has training and experience in fixing problem areas that arise in writing.

In any field, there is a difference between a professional and a lay person. Let's say you need to build a high rise. Do you go to a structural engineer or is Uncle Bob, who's lived a long time and works in a high rise, good enough?

Two points in response to this:

1. What kind of training and experience? And what constitutes sufficient of either?

An example: I am a proposals co-ordinator. That means when my company wants to bid to build a school or residential block or office, I get the client's documentation and have a set of questions to respond to. I then send out those questions to the bid team, comprising engineers, designers, planners, etc within the company. We have a meeting where we talk about win themes and how we're going to answer each question. They answer the questions and send them back to me. For each answer, I then read it and check it against the question that was asked, the answer plan we discussed earlier with key points, and the win themes. We have a review session and discuss the document, and between us we decide to change sections, cut bits, add bits, move bits around etc as necessary. Once this is done, I proofread the document and format it, then submit it. So, a certain amount of my day job involves content editing - asking response writers to change their responses to make them better. The editing and proofreading parts of my job probably take up about 5% of my time, a couple of hours a week for the last year.

As part of my job I also undergo constant training in job-related skills, like giving presentations, using inDesign, understanding the client - and editing responses to ensure they answer the question and persuade the client we're what they want.

At the same time, for the last year I've had a website where I have reviewed books on occasion. The number of reviews posted on my website is fewer than the number I have agreed to do; with some, I get a certain amount through the book and give up. In most cases, the review you see on the website isn't all I had to say. Those reviews, which range from 400 to 1000 words, are more in depth than many reviews. I consider a variety of aspects of the book in question, including plot, characterisation, pacing, mood, language and voice. Even for books I loved, I try to find something to criticise; no book is perfect. In the feedback I send an author, I go into more depth on my key points, provide specific examples, and explain my reasoning. I find it easier to be brutal for those I don't already know, those who approach me via my website, but I don't want to be mean; they've already published this, it's out there, and sure they can edit it and upload a new edition, but I'm not being paid for this, I'm probably not going to hear back from them, so it's not worth my time or theirs for me to bring up more than the worst offenders or general problems.

So I have experience in editing bid documents in a professional capacity. I have experience in reviewing fantasy books for my blog and providing feedback. I have an understanding of the fantasy genre and some experience in writing. If I were being paid to edit someone else's work, I'd give them more detailed, specific advice and feel more able to make suggestions than I do now, but at present this is offered, not asked for. I have even got a little bit of training in editing.

Is that enough training and experience to set up as a professional editor? How much experience editing should I have? How do I get expereince as an editor without saying "I'm an editor, hire me to edit your books"? And if someone asks me for a detailed beta read of their book, brutally honest, at a higher level than I give critiques normally on books I review, what's the difference between me doing that, and me charging for the same from a stranger and calling myself an editor? What's the difference between me doing that for a friend and them paying someone else who may or may not have experience in editing, in their genre, indeed in editing fiction at all? What about an editor with ten years of experience and who has gone on several training sessions, but never wrote a word of fiction themselves? What about an editor who has experience and training but just never quite got it, who just isn't that good at their job?

What training is enough? What experience is enough?


2. Yes, there's a difference between a professional and a layperson. But this isn't a case of you're either a member of the public with no high rise building experience, or you're an engineer at the prime of your career and lots of expereince in high rises. There is more nuance. You don't go on a training course and go from knowing nothing to knowing everything. You start by getting an engineering degree, then you start on site as a junior engineer and learn on the job. Or you start as a labourer and learn on the job and get sponsorship from your company to take an NVQ and keep learning on the job. Then either of these two routes will lead to more experience and more qualifications - HNC, ONC, whatever - until you become an expereinced engineer.

Nobody starts their career near the top of the ladder. You start on a lower rung and climb. The same goes for editing. Perhaps with my expereince, I'm a couple of rungs from the bottom already without ever calling myself a professional editor. I'm better than the guy who just left school with an English A level (I have one of those too, for the record) because I have different types of experience, I've probably read more books, and I've spent the last year reviewing books in depth. I've also been studying writing for the last decade, something I doubt an 18 year old has managed.

What I'm saying here is that a reasonably intelligent person with some experience of editing, lots of experience of the genre and knowledge of writing could just as easily be David's friend providing a free detailed critique as they could be someone with a start-up freelance editing business.

So how can you justify making that distinction when (a) you don't lknow the specifics of a trusted beta reader/editor working for free, (b) anyone can be an editor if they want, with whatever level of experience and training, so it's possible to hire an editor and only then discover they're crap, and (c) someone working for free for a friend could be considering starting up an editing business next month, with aforementioned friend as testimony to their skill and years of experience in writing, reviewing fantasy novel and content editing for technical documents, and they only haven't yet because they had a stable job before and didn't need to.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
I do think there's merit to hiring a professional editor. Especially if you're planning to self-publish. However, I don't think it's an absolute must. Writers should teach themselves editing skills that way they don't have to rely so much on other people to make their work shine.

I think that, as a group, new authors who don't have a built in audience vastly underestimate how good their work needs to be in order to be successful. Vastly. Really vastly.

The issue for me isn't as much about the need for an editor as it is about the need to be good. I happen to think that it's difficult to get to the necessary level without a lot of help, including that of a professional content editor.

Note that I make two distinctions in that initial statement:

1. New authors, but which I mean inexperienced. Fiction writing is not like any other writing we've been taught. It requires a skill set and learning well above and beyond learning grammar or anything that was taught to us regarding technical writing. If you've published a ton of novels or achieved the 10,000 hours of writing necessary to become an expert or you have a masters degree in fiction writing, my statement does not necessarily apply.

2. No built in audience. Some authors achieved success by giving away their work in an environment where they were able to get good feedback on what their audience wanted. These people were taught directly by their intended audience exactly what and how to write. Once they achieved a huge fanbase, they then published. That direct experience, imo, trumps anything an editor is going to be able to do for them.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
Chilari,

1. What kind of training and experience? And what constitutes sufficient of either?

Is that enough training and experience to set up as a professional editor?

If we're talking copy editing, I think the experience that you describe is probably adequate. I think that, when we're talking about content editing for fiction, I just don't see it.

I think a professional editor needs specific training and experience, and a lot of it, in fiction writing and on how to spot and fix the specific types of problems that authors are likely to encounter.

As I wrote in the post above, fiction writing requires skills and experience that have absolutely nothing to do with technical writing or grammar or punctuation. Editing fiction writing for content is about tension and characters and story. Whereas practically anyone is capable of saying, "I didn't like this and that," it takes, imo, special expertise to be able both to diagnose and make suggestions for fixing specific issues.

So how can you justify making that distinction when (a) you don't lknow the specifics of a trusted beta reader/editor working for free, (b) anyone can be an editor if they want, with whatever level of experience and training, so it's possible to hire an editor and only then discover they're crap, and (c) someone working for free for a friend could be considering starting up an editing business next month, with aforementioned friend as testimony to their skill and years of experience in writing, reviewing fantasy novel and content editing for technical documents, and they only haven't yet because they had a stable job before and didn't need to.

A) I can only go by my experience. I have yet to find a reviewer or beta reader, myself included, who come close to the level of experience, training, and skill needed. If your beta reader is a professional content editor, good for you!

B) There actually is a professional organization for editors that requires certain critieria be met. Authors are probably better off making sure that they use members of that organization.

C) There's always an outside chance that maybe your friend's skill/experience level is adequate. If you think that's the case, only you can make that decision.

Again, not trying to say arbitrarily: "Thou shalt use only a certified professional editor." I'm saying, "I think only a professional content editor is likely to be able to perform the function you absolutely need."
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
So I have experience in editing bid documents in a professional capacity. I have experience in reviewing fantasy books for my blog and providing feedback. I have an understanding of the fantasy genre and some experience in writing. If I were being paid to edit someone else's work, I'd give them more detailed, specific advice and feel more able to make suggestions than I do now, but at present this is offered, not asked for. I have even got a little bit of training in editing.

Is that enough training and experience to set up as a professional editor?

I think this discussion has gotten too much about credentials and isn't focused enough on the actual editing process.

For instance, consider the rates that editors charge, and then extrapolate those rates across the amount of work they're expected to put into it.

If I gave somebody a 30,000 word story, would they know how to put $500 of skilled work into improving it? What are the various impressions of what that work would look like?
 

Sanctified

Minstrel
Thanks for that. I requested my library to get "Cloud Atlas", but haven't gotten a chance yet. Still, the fact that you state it is "literary" makes me trepidatious to read it.

I'm not going to lie, some parts of Cloud Atlas are written in styles that can be difficult to comprehend at first -- the novel is structured like a Russian nesting doll, with a story within a story within a story within a story, and so on. Because the stories leap across several hundred years, with contemporary, unreliable narrators, it's like reading a book by six different authors with very different voices.

The first story is written as the diary of a notary on a missionary ship in the 1850s, and the last story is an oral history related by a far-future, post-apocalypse tribesman speaking an evolved pidgin with remnants of our language. But once you get the hang of it, both stories are beautiful, and the other stories are much easier to read, such as "The Ghastly Ordeal of Timothy Cavendish," which is rendered in a very British, modern prose and also happens to be one of the most hilarious things I've ever read.

The bottom line is, the effort required is well worth it because the reward is so sweet. It's not hype to say there is nothing like it, because there really is nothing like it. You know how you might admire a novel and think, "I'd really like to write like this guy"? I read David Mitchell's first book in 1999 (Ghostwritten) and thought, "There is no way I could ever write like this guy."
 

Sanctified

Minstrel
I think there are some misconceptions about what a book editor does. Phil made a very good point about self-editing, which is an absolutely necessary skill.

If you're handing a manuscript full of spelling and grammatical errors to a professional editor, you're wasting her time as well as your own. Of course we all make those mistakes, but it's on us to minimize the, because a professional editor's role is not to play high school grammar teacher. Her role is to make sure the narrative is tight and engaging, to look for errors in consistency and logic, and to help make your prose sing. We need professional editors because we're all human and we make mistakes, but we also need them because they have real expertise and experience, and because they're far enough removed from the story to assess what works and what doesn't.
 
Brian, please understand, I've seen books passed by what you would call "professional" editors that were just as bad as some indy books. Case in point (which I pointed out before, and which you apparently missed or ignored, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one) is The Magician's Guild.

Between chapter 3 and chapter 15 the protagonist goes through approximately a dozen repetitions of "girl on the run from the Guild moves to a new hiding place, she learns something new about her magic, and then the Guild gets close again." Over and over and over again. Lather, rinse, repeat ad nauseum. The only saving grace about those chapters is that what's happening within the Guild is slightly more varied, though I found it eminently predictable (Guild member that is known as disagreeable -- surprise! -- disagrees and causes problems).

Yet the "professional" editor(s) at Hachette thought this repetitive dreck was good enough to put on paper and ship to bookstores across the country.

Pray forgive me if I don't put a lot of faith in a group of people who are able to overlook such basic problems with the plot of a story.

Just a note about arguing (the mathematician in me has been screaming to get a word in as I've gotten caught up). An example doesn't prove anything. Your example of badly edited books doesn't help and Brian's example of editing improving his work doesn't help prove anything. There's nothing to prove. It's a matter of opinion, but if there was something to prove, then you couldn't do it with an example.

Also worth noting, Brian's insight here is invaluable because he is discussing the actual editing process from an editor. Any book we could cite as an example of a terrible book with terrible editing or whatever, we have NO IDEA what the editors told the author. It's possible (maybe not plausible, but possible) that the author was told to absolutely not do what ended up being done in the book. For bigger authors or even just established authors, I think they get a little more leeway, especially in directorial editing choices. This would explain the massacre that was Robin Hobb's Rain Wilds Chronicles. I would have never approved that as an editor to the books.

Two points in response to this:

1. What kind of training and experience? And what constitutes sufficient of either?
What training is enough? What experience is enough?

I think Brian's said it at least once, and I would have hoped that it would have been assumed, but you want a a *GOOD* editor. Everything else (experience, training, etc) falls by the wayside in your considerations (or should anyway, although those other considerations may be one way you judge someone until you get to know their work).

Yes there are bad editors, inexperienced editors, and all varieties, but you want a good one. How do you find a good editor would be a great topic for discussion, and everyone's different. People have different styles of writing and editing and you need to find an editor that is going to benefit your writing and that you can work with.

This is even more reason why I'm not bothering with paying an editor until I am more established. Finding a good editor that I can work with is a needle in a haystack venture and is not something that I am willing to spend time on until I know I would be able to afford it without going hungry.
 

GeekDavid

Auror
It's possible (maybe not plausible, but possible) that the author was told to absolutely not do what ended up being done in the book. For bigger authors or even just established authors, I think they get a little more leeway, especially in directorial editing choices. This would explain the massacre that was Robin Hobb's Rain Wilds Chronicles. I would have never approved that as an editor to the books.

These are this author's first books to the best of my knowledge, so she's not a "bigger or even just established" author. And if she defied what the editor told her to do, they shouldn't have published the books.

My point is that editors can screw up, even Big Name Publisher editors, and therefore they should not be invested with god-like wisdom. Telling someone to send a manuscript off to a Big Name Publisher to get it edited the right way (as Brian did to me) is exactly the sort of "you can't trust anyone but an expensive professional" attitude that rubs me entirely the wrong way.
 
C

Chessie

Guest
In case I have missed it, has anyone posted on here some things writers who aren't going the editor route can do to improve their manuscripts for publication? Granted, I do think having a GOOD editor who is familiar with the genre you are writing in is invaluable, but I cannot afford such a luxury at this time. Zero Angel, how do you go about having your manuscript sharpened without an editor? Anyone else have experience with this?
 
My point is that editors can screw up, even Big Name Publisher editors, and therefore they should not be invested with god-like wisdom. Telling someone to send a manuscript off to a Big Name Publisher to get it edited the right way (as Brian did to me) is exactly the sort of "you can't trust anyone but an expensive professional" attitude that rubs me entirely the wrong way.

I'm not sure anyone has claimed they're infallible, only invaluable.

In case I have missed it, has anyone posted on here some things writers who aren't going the editor route can do to improve their manuscripts for publication? Granted, I do think having a GOOD editor who is familiar with the genre you are writing in is invaluable, but I cannot afford such a luxury at this time. Zero Angel, how do you go about having your manuscript sharpened without an editor? Anyone else have experience with this?

Well, I've gotten a lot better at self-editing first of all. I do several read-throughs with a variety of different things I'm looking for. I'm constantly on the lookout for grammar and wording issues, but I'm mostly reading for pacing, continuity, cadence and interest. After I've worked out most of the kinks, I do a read-through aloud to see how it reads that way.

For my first novel, I did a TFP deal with an "up-and-coming editor" (call your local university's English department). Even though I didn't have a great experience, I still think it's a good option to explore. The more eyes on your manuscript the better, and you may luck out with a talented unknown. I had the usual gamut of beta readers as well, and it was nice to hear their thoughts and takes on the characters, story and action.

I do a lot of outlining, both before and during the story and I connect scenes with continuity lines in my notes, writing down what new things the reader discovers or what they need to figure out so I make sure that I cover everything. I have a "what the reader knows" document where I write down when and how the reader finds something out, and if it is privy only to a few characters, then I write that there too. My series is scheduled for 12+ books though, so this is preventative maintenance more than anything.

I'm sure there's more that I do, but it has been a little while since I've edited a novel. For shorter stories, everything is much more straightforward and easier.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
Telling someone to send a manuscript off to a Big Name Publisher to get it edited the right way (as Brian did to me) is exactly the sort of "you can't trust anyone but an expensive professional" attitude that rubs me entirely the wrong way.

I've read a lot of self published stuff. I've read a lot of posts by self published authors.

If you list the following two problems for self published authors:

1. I paid money to a good editor and wasn't happy with the results.
2. I self published my book without an editor and the result wasn't very good.

From my experience, the second of those two problems is much more widespread and much more damaging to the career of the author in question. That's not to say that the first one isn't valid, but I tend to focus on the more common and disasterous of the two.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
This is even more reason why I'm not bothering with paying an editor until I am more established. Finding a good editor that I can work with is a needle in a haystack venture and is not something that I am willing to spend time on until I know I would be able to afford it without going hungry.

Thus far, I've worked with two editors and found both of them well worth the money. I don't think that either of them were perfect, but I learned a lot from each.

I think the keys to finding a good editor are:

1. Make it clear that you're looking for content editing. (I think that most writers on the board can provide you with help with copy editing. I'd love to pay a professional copy editor, but I think content editing is so much more important and harder to find good help with.)
2. Have the prospective editor do a small section of your work as a sample.
3. Look at the sample work. Did the editor make excellent suggestions on how to improve tension and pace and character and story? If not, move on to the next one.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
In case I have missed it, has anyone posted on here some things writers who aren't going the editor route can do to improve their manuscripts for publication?

I think the best advice I can give here is to not rush to publication. Get a lot of sets of eyes on it. Trade beta reading with the best authors you can find. Learn as much as you can from each of them and do a lot of drafts.

Truthfully, my main point in everything I've written in this thread is:

Creating a good book is much, much harder than most self published authors think.
 

GeekDavid

Auror
For all you, pro and con, I am running an impromptu experiment.

Since I've decided to back-shelf Librarian for a while, I told my friend he didn't have to edit it, but he said he'd still like to give it a shot, because he really likes the story concept. He also mentioned that he can edit for story/character development, expansion/contraction/development, as well as technical.

Since we have a bit of a disagreement here, I've also sent the identical manuscript off to Patrick Richardson, who is the editor-in-chief at Otherwhere Gazette, and who is also a professional newspaper reporter and editor.

In other words, I've sent the same manuscript off to both an amateur and professional editor, allowing me to compare and contrast the suggestions they make. I'll report the results here when I get them... assuming I haven't gotten myself kicked off before then.
 
C

Chessie

Guest
I do agree that creating a good book is much more difficult than I originally thought it would be. This creation is my baby, and the last thing I want to do is stab it to death on the Amazon market. Thank you for the suggestions BW and Zero, they are very helpful.

GeekDavid, awesome! Good luck with your experiment. I hope it turns out something really good for you.
 

GeekDavid

Auror
GeekDavid, awesome! Good luck with your experiment. I hope it turns out something really good for you.

My suspicion is that the "professionals only" camp will take the "well, you found the one in a billion good amateur" line if my friend happens to edit just as well as the professionals.
 

Chilari

Staff
Moderator
Interesting experiment.

I'd like to see a similar experiement (or maybe try it myself. Write a story. After getting it to a good position myself, I stop working on it. Then split it in two. In one, change all the character names. Send version A to a professional editor. Edit the A version based solely on feedback from that editor. Send version B to ten beta readers, and edit the B manuscript based solely on feedback from them. With copyediting, do the same thing - A goes to a professional, B goes via a few people good at English grammar. Publish both versions under pseudonyms, having set up author platform blogs for both with very similar marketing efforts (not identical blog posts, but very similar topics, and posted at the exact same times). Conduct exactly the same marketing efforts - when one tweets, so does the other. See how many downloads each version gets. Is there a difference? Which direction does it favour?

Of course, this costs money. Plus, the optimum approach would obviously be to use both methods - get beta readers first, then a professional. Different pairs of eyes, different approaches. But still, it would be interesting to see the results.

So if anyone has a novelette they don't know what to do with and a few grand going spare, please have a go at this!
 

GeekDavid

Auror
Interesting experiment.

I'd like to see a similar experiement (or maybe try it myself. Write a story. After getting it to a good position myself, I stop working on it. Then split it in two. In one, change all the character names. Send version A to a professional editor. Edit the A version based solely on feedback from that editor. Send version B to ten beta readers, and edit the B manuscript based solely on feedback from them. With copyediting, do the same thing - A goes to a professional, B goes via a few people good at English grammar. Publish both versions under pseudonyms, having set up author platform blogs for both with very similar marketing efforts (not identical blog posts, but very similar topics, and posted at the exact same times). Conduct exactly the same marketing efforts - when one tweets, so does the other. See how many downloads each version gets. Is there a difference? Which direction does it favour?

Of course, this costs money. Plus, the optimum approach would obviously be to use both methods - get beta readers first, then a professional. Different pairs of eyes, different approaches. But still, it would be interesting to see the results.

So if anyone has a novelette they don't know what to do with and a few grand going spare, please have a go at this!

After I hit the Powerball or win the Publisher's Clearing House prize, I'll give that a shot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top