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

On NOT Hiring an Editor (Interview)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sanctified

Minstrel
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.


I'm a newspaper reporter and editor. I wouldn't trust most of my colleagues to edit fiction. Different ball game.
 

ThinkerX

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? 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?

Set aside for several weeks. Work on something else, let your attention get absorbed by that something else. Then pull the first project out of (digital?) storage and start reading. A lot of things needing fixing *will* leap out at you. A lot of other things you thought 'not so good' will seem good. At least, thats how it worked with me...and in some cases, the older work had been tucked away for over a decade.
 

Sanctified

Minstrel
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?

You're talking about self-publishing, yeah? An alternative is to submit to a good compilation. I've seen quite a few that anchor the collection with big names, but make a point to say they'll accept submissions and are actively looking for new voices. Editing is part of the process, so you also get the benefit of working with a professional editor without it costing you anything. Can't hurt to try.

As far as straight-up self-publishing, ebooks or hard copy, I'm afraid I don't have an easy answer. I have an online friend who is a professional fiction editor and maybe she'll be willing to answer some questions. I'll follow up here if she's up for that.
 

Sanctified

Minstrel
Yeah, I know, I have to use the Officially Approved Editors of the High Llamas of Fantasy as shown by the Holy Laying On Of Hands.

Dude that argument you're having in this thread is a whole other thing, no need to get defensive. I'm not one of the people posting absolutes or saying you've got to do X to be successful. I'm a chill dude and willing to listen to any perspective, and I try to be as respectful as possible.

You're using your friend's expertise as a reporter to make a point. Fair enough. But I'm saying journalism and fiction writing are two very different things, and most journalists don't have the skill set to serve as fiction editors.
 

GeekDavid

Auror
Dude that argument you're having in this thread is a whole other thing, no need to get defensive. I'm not one of the people posting absolutes or saying you've got to do X to be successful. I'm a chill dude and willing to listen to any perspective, and I try to be as respectful as possible.

You're using your friend's expertise as a reporter to make a point. Fair enough. But I'm saying journalism and fiction writing are two very different things, and most journalists don't have the skill set to serve as fiction editors.

So, the man who makes his living editing isn't good enough, because he isn't a fantasy editor.

I get it, really, I do. I was just pointing it out in a sarcastic way, because that's the way I am... I am a sarcast with a little human wrapped around me.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
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!

I think an experiment is a good idea. I'm not sure what your plan of how to judge the results is entirely feasible from a time and effort standpoint.

Most of us, when we received feedback, eventually come to understand the worth of that feedback. Not sure a big evaluation is needed.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
Chilari,

I'm going to take one more stab at trying to get my point across:

Let's take the following sentence -

Jake sew that, all of the children were walking.

Forget "any reasonable person." Any idiot with some knowledge of English would be able to point out that "sew" was probably meant to be "saw" and that the comma after "that" is incorrect.

Is this feedback valuable?

Absolutely, leaving typos like these in your story makes you look unprofessional. Any help getting rid of them is much appreciated.

On the other hand, the number of people who can provide this feedback lessens its worth from a monetary standpoint.

Let's move to the next level of comments:

Jake saw that all of the children were walking.

A lot of beginning writers seem to think that it's necessary to add "were/was" before the verb. I think that most of the people on this board would easily point out to them that a) it's not necessary and b) it makes you look like a beginning writer.

A lot of us would also point out that "of" is superfluous and should be deleted. Some would say the same for "that" and "all."

These kind of changes are good. Tight writing is, in general, better. These comments, imo, are also a bit more valuable than the ones before because they require more knowledge on the part of the commenter.

Moving on:

Jake saw the children walking.

"Walking" doesn't paint much of a picture. Are they strolling, trudging, skipping? Find a better word!

It takes a bit more experience to make this kind of comment, making it more valuable.

Jake saw the children strolling.

"Saw" indicates that a narrator is telling us what the POV character, Jake, is seeing. Is there a reason for the narrative distance?

Nice. Good comment. This person understands a bit about POV.

Now we have:

The children strolled.

To my way of thinking, nothing about changing the sentence from its original version to the one immediately above makes the story better. All it does is make the writing less bad.

Don't get me wrong. Less bad is much better than more bad.

The important point is that I don't feel that any of the advice above is worth any of my hard-earned money. IMO, your story should be at this level before you ever send it to an editor. Those kind of changes are why you need good beta readers, and it's stuff you should know before you ever think you're ready to publish. I think of them as prerequisites.

So, what do I consider important?

A good content editor is going to look at that sentence and ask, "Why is the sentence there? Does it increase tension? Reveal character? Advance plot?" Ideally, your sentence not only accomplishes one of these three things but all three.

A content editor is not concerned with wordsmithing. A content editor is concerned about story.

Just as it takes a writer a long time to gain an understanding of the techniques laid out in those first comments, it takes even longer to gain a true understanding of how to craft stories.

I don't know about the other writers on this board, but I'm not nearly there yet as far as story goes. I do stupid stuff that robs tension. I make mistakes that present my characters as less relatable. I pen scenes that obscure plot rather than reveal it.

It has been my experience that it is hard to find people who understand how to fix those mistakes. For example, I posted my opening chapter in the Showcase forum many times and received comments. I sent it to many, many beta readers. I brought it to my writing group twice.

My editor, upon first read, immediately pointed out structural mistakes that robbed tension. No one else noticed these mistakes.

If you can find someone with the level of knowledge necessary to find these mistakes and tell you how to correct them without charging you for them, good on you. I wish I could find that person.

The important point is that fixing those story mistakes is crucial to making you successful as a writer.
 
Last edited:

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
The important point is that I don't feel that any of the advice above is worth any of my hard-earned money. IMO, your story should be at this level before you ever send it to an editor. Those kind of changes are why you need good beta readers, and it's stuff you should know before you ever think you're ready to publish. I think of them as prerequisites.

I agree with this. Good beta readers that pay attention to little things are pretty important so that you don't at least look unprofessional. I've seen a lot of pros use "was" and "were" in abundance and they still do fine, so I'm not sure how much that matters to every single editor. As a general rule, it's better to clean those up when you can.

So, what do I consider important?

A good content editor is going to look at that sentence and ask, "Why is the sentence there? Does it increase tension? Reveal character? Advance plot?" Ideally, your sentence not only accomplishes one of these three things but all three.

This is something that you could spend your whole life doing and never get right. It's a bit tricky as well. If an editor has to constantly tell you that your sentences aren't accomplishing anything, then that's a pretty serious problem. Hopefully, after seeing these issues pointed out, you can learn from these problems and limit them in any future novels or drafts. These are skills you have to learn as a writer and not necessarily rely on a content editor to clean up for you. Sure, it helps a lot in the beginning, but as time goes on, hopefully a writer doesn't keep running into these same problems.

The technique Scene-Sequel is a good way to avoid this. It may seem formulaic at first, but once you figure out how to make every single scene mean something, it's a good way to teach yourself how to crawl before learning to run. Here are two posts about the technique for those interested: The first five pages of your manuscript and Writing The Perfect Scene: Advanced Fiction Writing Tips If these methods seem too rigid or strict, you don't have to follow them completely. Some complain that this creates bland, formulaic fiction. However, I bet some of your favorite books have been written this way and you don't even realize it.
A content editor is not concerned with wordsmithing. A content editor is concerned about story.

Just as it takes a writer a long time to gain an understanding of the techniques laid out in those first comments, it takes even longer to gain a true understanding of how to craft stories.

To me being a good writer and a good storyteller are always going to be vastly different. I get in arguments about this all the time, but I feel like you can only become so good as a storyteller. You reach your plateau eventually. Maybe your plateau is super-awesome, but everyone reaches a ceiling at some point. On the other hand, I think you can become a better writer until the day you die. It's one of those skills you can completely master.

Storytelling I'm sure not works the same way.

There are just some people who are naturally better at telling stories than others. I've heard people ramble for hours and hours about their weekend in which basically nothing happened. However, I've also heard people tell stories in five minutes that had me on the edge of my seat (usually older people).

What I mean is, you could study for a thousand years and never understand how to perfect your method of crafting a story. You have to make due with what you have now and hope you learn things along the way.

I don't know about the other writers on this board, but I'm not nearly there yet as far as story goes. I do stupid stuff that robs tension. I make mistakes that present my characters as less relatable. I pen scenes that obscure plot rather than reveal it.

It has been my experience that it is hard to find people who understand how to fix those mistakes. For example, I posted my opening chapter in the Showcase forum many times and received comments. I sent it to many, many beta readers. I brought it to my writing group twice.

My editor, upon first read, immediately pointed out structural mistakes that robbed tension. No one else noticed these mistakes.

Everyone is going to notice different things. Obviously, you feel you made the right choice by using an editor. However, it sounds like you're discounting your beta readers and writing group partners as merely copywriters, something you mentioned you don't really need. If your editor is the only person who found these problems, it's because he/she does it for a living. There are really only so many ways to write, honestly, so he/she's probably seen them all umpteen times.

If you can find someone with the level of knowledge necessary to find these mistakes and tell you how to correct them without charging you for them, good on you. I wish I could find that person.

They exist. Making friends with an editor is never a bad idea.

The important point is that fixing those story mistakes is crucial to making you successful as a writer.

I agree, but I don't believe paying an editor is the only way. I'm pretty sure the writers of Beowulf and Gilgamesh didn't have editors. And I could be completely wrong, but Shakespeare's writing was probably not edited by a pro either. If I'm wrong, pour poison in my ear. :)
 
Last edited:

GeekDavid

Auror
I agree, but I don't believe paying an editor is the only way. I'm pretty sure the writers of Beowulf and Gilgamesh didn't have editors. And I could be completely wrong, but Shakespeare's writing was probably not edited by a pro either. If I'm wrong, pour poison in my ear. :)

Who was Homer's editor? Who was Mark Twain's? How about Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's? ;)

I also find it interesting that in a previous post, Brian commented that technical things like grammar and sentence structure are trivial, yet his own examples above seem to be on the same "trivial" technical level. Nothing in his examples that I can find about character development, story structure, level of tension, etc.
 

Chilari

Staff
Moderator
Brian, I think it depends on what you ask beta readers to look for. If you ask beta readers to look at tension and sentence structure, that's what they're going to comment on most. If you ask them to consider overall plot and the value of individual scenes to that goal, characterisation and character growth, and other "big picture" things, they'll look at that. If you post an excerpt int he Showcase, that's all the beta reader can examine and thus the feedback will necessarily be small-scale stuff like sentence structure, perhaps also looking at things like pacing and characterisation within the scene; but beta readers looking at 1000 words on a forum cannot comment on plot structure.

I'm not saying beta readers will do better than a professional editor by any means. What I'm saying is:

1. A professional editor is an expense not all self-publishers can justify.
2. A book that has not seen a professional editor is not automatically awful.
3. It could be possible to gain success as an indie author without a professional editor
4. Any author who wants to achieve success must invest the time and effort to make their book as good as they can make it. For some, the best use of their available resources is a professional editor. For others, that's not an option but there are alternatives.

I think that several rounds of edits with successive groups of beta readers would give a novel sufficient polish to allow it to be successful. Once the author has the book as good as they can make it alone, they send it out to the first group and ask specifically for feedback on plot and characterisation. Then they edit based on feedback. A few more rounds of that, asking beta readers to focus on specific areas each time, followed by a thorough copyedit, should see a solid, polished, publishable manuscript without the need for a professional editor. It would require more time and a lot of beta readers, yes, but I think it would be possible.

And what also can we do if we don't have $1000 sitting unused in our bank accounts? Those of us who live paycheque to paycheque can't save up much and when we can we spend it on emergencies or house maintenance or the car we need to get to work every day to keep earning an income. Where am I going to find the money to hire a professional editor? I've spent the last year saving up for a £200 dishwasher, in a house I don't pay rent on because my mother in law owns it. A payrise is not going to happen. So either I put my novel on hold for years until I'm earning more money (which requires the global financial crisis to end - unlikely, given the US government's situation) or I find alternative methods of editing my manuscript.

Maybe it's worth spending that kind of money for you, but not everyone can afford it. There are other priorities. So accepting that there are alternatives means those people are allowed to consider publishing. Discussing alterantives is healthy; it gives hope to those who can't afford professional services, and it gives those who can afford it more ways to improve their manuscript before spending money.

So maybe the approach we need to take here isn't "do you need an editor?" and arguing over that, but "how can you make your manuscript as good as it can be without spending money?"

That's what I want to see discussed.
 
Last edited:

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
So maybe the approach we need to take here isn't "do you need an editor?" and arguing over that, but "how can you make your manuscript as good as it can be without spending money?"

Perhaps a new thread would be in order for that discussion because I think it warrants its own focus.

About money: there are priorities of course. However, the discussion often goes "Should I spent money on cover art or an editor?" I see these as common issues. If I have the money and I decide to self-published, I'd probably invest in an editor if I were able. I'd probably have a "Novel Budget" that I'd save up if I could. Now I'm not really in a position to do such.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
I also find it interesting that in a previous post, Brian commented that technical things like grammar and sentence structure are trivial, yet his own examples above seem to be on the same "trivial" technical level. Nothing in his examples that I can find about character development, story structure, level of tension, etc.

Did you happen to notice that I elaborated on all those technical things and then said, "All that is great, but it's essentially worthless?"

Perhaps you missed the point?
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
The simplest and most correct answer seems to me to be that you have to do what works for you.

Some people can write without the help of a professional editor and put out a high-quality, professional end product. If you can do that, great. More power to you.

Some people can't do that, and without the help of an editor will put out something substantially worse than it should be. If you're in that category, it certainly pays to hire an editor if you can do so.
 

GeekDavid

Auror
The simplest and most correct answer seems to me to be that you have to do what works for you.

Some people can write without the help of a professional editor and put out a high-quality, professional end product. If you can do that, great. More power to you.

Some people can't do that, and without the help of an editor will put out something substantially worse than it should be. If you're in that category, it certainly pays to hire an editor if you can do so.

And not all non-professional editors are useless. Many could be professional editors if they wanted to.
 

GeekDavid

Auror
Dude that argument you're having in this thread is a whole other thing, no need to get defensive. I'm not one of the people posting absolutes or saying you've got to do X to be successful. I'm a chill dude and willing to listen to any perspective, and I try to be as respectful as possible.

You're using your friend's expertise as a reporter to make a point. Fair enough. But I'm saying journalism and fiction writing are two very different things, and most journalists don't have the skill set to serve as fiction editors.

By the way, Mr. Richardson has edited Cat's Paw and Ratskiller for fantasy author Robert A. Hoyt, one SF novel he can't remember, and serves as beta reader for several authors, including Sarah A. Hoyt (mother of Robert). He also serves as beta reader for Dave Freer, Kate Paulk, and Amanda Greene; and reads WIPs for Michael Z. Williamson.

But I guess since he hasn't been invested with the Diamond d20 by the High Llamas of Fantasy he's still not qualified.

Edited to add: A question such as, "has he ever edited or beta-read anything other than newspapers" would have resulted in a much nicer response than making the (erroneous) assumption that he had not.
 
Last edited:

Sanctified

Minstrel
By the way, Mr. Richardson has edited Cat's Paw and Ratskiller for fantasy author Robert A. Hoyt, one SF novel he can't remember, and serves as beta reader for several authors, including Sarah A. Hoyt (mother of Robert). He also serves as beta reader for Dave Freer, Kate Paulk, and Amanda Greene; and reads WIPs for Michael Z. Williamson.

But I guess since he hasn't been invested with the Diamond d20 by the High Llamas of Fantasy he's still not qualified.

Edited to add: A question such as, "has he ever edited or beta-read anything other than newspapers" would have resulted in a much nicer response than making the (erroneous) assumption that he had not.

I said none of the things, and you're attributing other people's arguments to me, which I don't appreciate especially after I already told you politely I'm here to have chill conversations with an open mind. What I DID say is that, as a newspaper reporter, I would not trust the vast majority of my colleagues to edit fiction because it's a completely different skill set.

You're using this "I have a friend who's a newspaper reporter!" as a bludgeon in this conversation, but writing for a conservative rag started by Tucker Carlson does not make anyone a legitimate newspaper reporter. You dont springboard from that to a decent newspaper. But what do I know? I've only worked for the Wall Street Journal, Associated Press and Newsday. You know, actual newspapers and wire services that report the news, win Pulitzers and stick to the professional standard of objectivity instead of shilling for a political party.

But, hey, maybe some dude who has a friend whose aunt's officemate works at the East Bumble$&@£ Herald Turdsman can set me right by telling me how it's done in rural newsrooms staffed by novelists.

You've been combative on the boards, you were absolutely rude in the chat room the other night, and you seem hell bent on disagreeing with people for the sake of disagreeing. I didn't come here to have arguments, so our conversation is over and I'll avoid exchanging messages with you in the future. Cheers.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
Just a reminder - people are invariably going to disagree on these sorts of issues, and given how personal the craft is to most of us, that disagreement can sometimes lead to hurt feelings or defensive feelings. Let's try to keep the criticism of different paths to the substantive issues themselves, and not focused on traits of an individual who might happen to take an opposing view.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
Phil,

However, it sounds like you're discounting your beta readers and writing group partners as merely copywriters, something you mentioned you don't really need.

Just to be clear, I said nothing of the kind.

First, technical advice is much appreciated and needed. I simply said that, since it's easy to come by with beta readers, I wouldn't want to pay an editor for it.

Second, I have received content advice from my beta readers; they're just not knowledgeable/experienced enough to tell me what I really needed.

If your editor is the only person who found these problems, it's because he/she does it for a living. There are really only so many ways to write, honestly, so he/she's probably seen them all umpteen times.

This is exactly the point I tried to make over and over again: a professional editor can provide advice that others can't because they have more knowledge and experience.

To me being a good writer and a good storyteller are always going to be vastly different. I get in arguments about this all the time, but I feel like you can only become so good as a storyteller. You reach your plateau eventually. Maybe your plateau is super-awesome, but everyone reaches a ceiling at some point. On the other hand, I think you can become a better writer until the day you die. It's one of those skills you can completely master.

Interesting topic, but I'd prefer not to chase that rabbit in this thread. :)

This is something that you could spend your whole life doing and never get right. It's a bit tricky as well. If an editor has to constantly tell you that your sentences aren't accomplishing anything, then that's a pretty serious problem. Hopefully, after seeing these issues pointed out, you can learn from these problems and limit them in any future novels or drafts. These are skills you have to learn as a writer and not necessarily rely on a content editor to clean up for you. Sure, it helps a lot in the beginning, but as time goes on, hopefully a writer doesn't keep running into these same problems.

I could not agree more. Writing is a learning process for all of us. I've learned a lot from my beta readers, from my writing group, and from my editors.
 

BWFoster78

Myth Weaver
Chilari,

Brian, I think it depends on what you ask beta readers to look for. If you ask beta readers to look at tension and sentence structure, that's what they're going to comment on most. If you ask them to consider overall plot and the value of individual scenes to that goal, characterisation and character growth, and other "big picture" things, they'll look at that. If you post an excerpt int he Showcase, that's all the beta reader can examine and thus the feedback will necessarily be small-scale stuff like sentence structure, perhaps also looking at things like pacing and characterisation within the scene; but beta readers looking at 1000 words on a forum cannot comment on plot structure.

I am a much better beta reader now than when I started coming to this forum. The reason? Because I'm a much better writer than when I started. I have more knowledge and more experience.

When I started beta reading (both full novels as exchanges and on the Showcase), I focused solely on technique. I didn't understand deep POV. Tension wasn't something that entered my mind.

Simply put, I could only give advice on the areas that I understood.

That's still the case, but, now, I know more and can comment on more. I continue to think that the knowledge required to perform the level of analysis that the beginning novelist needs is rare.

1. A professional editor is an expense not all self-publishers can justify.

And please understand that what I'm saying is that I'm not sure it's an expense that a self publisher can afford not to justify. I think the best chance to achieve success is through quality. I think the best chance to achieve quality is through use of a professional content editor.

I feel that some consider that opinion somehow adversarial or condescending or something, and I'm just not getting why.

2. A book that has not seen a professional editor is not automatically awful.

Nor is a book that has seen a professional editor automatically great. I agree.

Consider, however, if "not awful" is what is necessary for success.

3. It could be possible to gain success as an indie author without a professional editor

Anything is possible. I think that use of a professional editor is both worth what you spend and increases the likelihood of achieving success.

4. Any author who wants to achieve success must invest the time and effort to make their book as good as they can make it. For some, the best use of their available resources is a professional editor. For others, that's not an option but there are alternatives.

If a professional editor is not an option, why go the self publishing route? If your work is good enough, you should be able to find a traditional publisher. Once you've gained the necessary experience and an audience, you can always switch to self publishing.

Why is this not a valid choice?

I think that several rounds of edits with successive groups of beta readers would give a novel sufficient polish to allow it to be successful. Once the author has the book as good as they can make it alone, they send it out to the first group and ask specifically for feedback on plot and characterisation. Then they edit based on feedback. A few more rounds of that, asking beta readers to focus on specific areas each time, followed by a thorough copyedit, should see a solid, polished, publishable manuscript without the need for a professional editor. It would require more time and a lot of beta readers, yes, but I think it would be possible.

I think that this can only work if you can find beta readers who have the knowledge to tell you what you've done wrong. If you have that, you're good.

The problem is that I think it's hard to find people with the necessary knowledge.

And what also can we do if we don't have $1000 sitting unused in our bank accounts?

For the record, I paid my editor $550 for my 120,000 word novel. Still a large amount, but half of what you estimate...

Those of us who live paycheque to paycheque can't save up much and when we can we spend it on emergencies or house maintenance or the car we need to get to work every day to keep earning an income. Where am I going to find the money to hire a professional editor? I've spent the last year saving up for a £200 dishwasher, in a house I don't pay rent on because my mother in law owns it. A payrise is not going to happen. So either I put my novel on hold for years until I'm earning more money (which requires the global financial crisis to end - unlikely, given the US government's situation) or I find alternative methods of editing my manuscript.

Again, after you've polished your manuscript to a high gloss shine, why not submit it to agents, publishers, small publishers, etc? Why is self publishing the only option?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top