I spend a lot of my time working as a freelance nonfiction editor. Although I do work with many writers who have had their work edited by professional editors before, I probably work with more writers who have never encountered the editing process with anyone other than a writing buddy, someone in their writing group, a spouse, or a high school teacher or college professor. Thus, they really have no idea what it means to work with a professional editor.
For this reason, I’d like to devote this post to explaining how the process works. I’m going to describe the process of editing a book; however, the same process would pertain to editing an essay, article, e-book, or anything else you might bring to me for editing.
Types of Editors and Editing
First, let me explain the kind of editing I do for my clients. I do “line editing,” “content editing” and “developmental editing.” That means I study each one of your sentences and decide how to make it not only grammatically correct but also the strongest sentence possible (line editing). I also make sure that everything makes sense, that you’ve explained yourself well, that readers are not left with questions (content editing), and that all the pieces are included—that nothing needs to be added—or deleted—and that everything is where it belongs. I look at the minute details and the big picture.
Some editors just do line editing. Some just do content editing. Some just do developmental editing.
Some writers think that they must live close to their editor. It doesn’t matter if you live in New York and I live in California. We can talk by phone…even by Skype if you want, and we send documents back and forth by email. You can even live in another country than your editor, and you can still have a successful working relationship. They key is to find someone with whom you can work well. It is nice, however, if you live close to each other and can occasionally meet in person.
Others worry about theft of intellectual property. There’s no need to worry about the editor stealing your ideas or your writing. An editor has to treat the information you offer in the form of your book idea, proposal or manuscript at “privileged.” Despite what some people say, little idea stealing occurs in the publishing industry.
How to Choose an Editor
Also, when choosing an editor, find one that suits your “style.” I’m not a “coddle-my-writers” type of editor. I tell it like it is. I want to help you improve, so I’m not going to tell you something is great when it isn’t. And I’m not going to hold back on your manuscript—unless you specifically tell me to do so. So, talk to editors before you begin working with one.
I love it when an author is working right with me, waiting anxiously for me to finish a chapter or a section of an article so they can get to work on it. Then we have a mutual flow and are in synch. We develop one “mind” and one “voice.” I also really enjoy working with writers who want to improve their writing and work hard early on to improve the manuscript so I don’t have to spend the time poring over every sentence trying to figure out how to make it read well. They go away feeling proud of themselves for having become better writers. A few of my clients have gone on to write several books without me afterwards claiming I made them good enough writers to not need an editor any longer! What high praise!
So, choose your editor carefully. Check out their track record. Look for testimonials from past clients. And if possible, test them out. For example, I am usually at the San Francisco Writers Conference working as a book doctor. These are free short consultations. I also often do a short test edit on people’s work when I give an estimate of how long it will take to edit a job. This gives you an idea of my style and how I would edit your work. Hopefully, other editors will give you the same type of courtesy.
Phase I: The Analysis
When working with a book, more often than not, I begin with an analysis of the whole manuscript. This means I read the whole manuscript and make notes in the margins about what needs to be improved. I then go back and compose a document giving the author, first, a general idea of what has to be done to improve the book, and second, specific recommendations on a chapter-by-chapter basis.
This document becomes the blueprint for all the work done on the manuscript from that point forward. A writer who really wants to learn and improve their own writing will take this document and create a new and improved draft of the manuscript by incorporating as many of my suggestions as possible. This then comes back to me for the first phase of actual editing. Some writers prefer to have me just begin editing at this point; they give me the go ahead to implement my own suggestions.
Not all writers choose to have an analysis completed on their book. A written analysis does take time and can add considerably to the editing expense. That said, it is extremely helpful. When an author doesn’t want to complete this phase, I always recommend that they have me at least read the whole manuscript. Then I have a big picture view of the project and can at least jot some helpful notes to myself as I read. We can then have a consultation about what the book needs as far as improvements go. Some writers choose to do neither of these two and just have my dig right in and start editing, though.
Phase II: First-Round Editing
In this phase of editing, I attach everything I see! I work on every sentence to make it grammatically correct and to make it as strong as possible. I am looking to make the author’s writing as good as I can make it—if it isn’t already. Additionally, I do content and development editing.
I like to use Microsoft Word’s track changes option. This allows the author to see every change I make on their document. I also can leave them comments, which I do a lot. I leave little messages about information that needs to be added. I will explain why I deleted copy or why I went ahead and ghostwrote a few sentences or a paragraph. I will ask questions or suggest moving copy around (or tell them why I moved copy around).
When I’m done with this phase, as my daughter says, the document bleeds whatever color track changes uses—one color for additions, another for deletions and one more for comments! The pages look a bit scary, so I usually send another version along as well that has the changes “accepted.” This allows the author to read a “clean” copy with just the comment showing. Then they can actually read without stress and notice the improvements rather than all the changes. They also can see the comments clearly.
At this point, the manuscript becomes their “ball” to handle. The authors must address all my concerns. Typically with a book I send back one chapter at a time, and the author works on that chapter. We work through the book chapter by chapter until we have completed the whole manuscript. It’s a bit like tag team. Once I finish a chapter, I send it to the author and go on to the next. They author works on that chapter. I complete another and send it one, and so on. When we the author finishes making changes to the last chapter I edited, hopefully the whole manuscript gets sent back to me for a second round of editing.
I say hopefully because not all authors choose to go on to the second round of editing. I highly recommend that they do. I’ll explain why.
Phase III: Round-Two Editing
In round-two editing, I have a chance to check two things:
- My own work. Yes, sometimes the editor makes mistakes. In the first round, I make so many changes that I can and do sometimes miss a grammatical mistake—or make one. I may not see a misplaced or missing comma. I may delete a necessary word. I may change a sentence in a way that makes it unclear. Now, this is uncommon, but it does happen. So, I want to check my work. If I make 100 changes on one page (and a book has 150 pages), the likelihood becomes high likelihood that when I come back to check my own work, I’m going to find something upon which I want to at least improve.
- The writer’s additions and changes. The writer has now gone through the manuscript and had a chance to accept or reject my changes. He or she has also made changes or his or her own and addressed all the issues I raised. Therefore, the manuscript has numerous areas that now need to either be re-edited or that have fresh copy needing first-round editing. I want to get my eyes on all of this and check for grammar, punctuation, content, etc.
Authors who choose not to do this round of editing don’t realize its value. So much can be caught and fixed and improved, especially since the writing is much cleaner and more polished at this point and all the pieces are in place.
Most writers decide they don’t want to spend the money on another editing round thinking it will be as expensive as the first. In fact, it goes much faster. The second round of editing usually takes me about half the time as the first round.
If you don’t believe me, ask some other editors what they think about how much editing a manuscript needs. I listened in on an editing panel at the San Francisco Writers Conference two years ago and was pleased to hear Alan Rinzler, a freelance editor of great repute and an executive editor at Jossey-Bass Publishing in San Francisco, say that he recommends at least two rounds of editing but prefers three rounds.
I have edited one or two manuscripts three times. The results were measurable…and well worth it.
And…if you are wanting to give yourself the gift of an editor for one of your manuscripts in the New Year, click here for a special offer—my gift to my blog readers!