Editor Question

[benjaminmauney]

How are you suppose to show a writer what you edited in their paper?

That way they know what you changed and all that good stuffs

 

[sr71plt]

Word has what they call a "tracking change" system. When it's turned on, an editor can strike through words without erasing them (and this shows up in a different color from the original text) and when they put anything in it shows up in a different color two. So whatever editing is done when "tracking change" is on won't erase what's there; it will superimpose suggested changes on top of the manuscript and highlight them. The author can then at a click of "accept" and "reject" buttons either accept the change or delete it.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

How are you suppose to show a writer what you edited in their paper?

That way they know what you changed and all that good stuffs

I use MSWord "Track Changes" and usually add a comment to say why I have changed something. This can be as short as Typo or as long as Names: You have several names which are too close for comfort (Jack, Jacob, and now Jake). Remember that you know all these people very well; they have been in your mind for months, or even years. The reader is meeting them for the first (and sometimes only) time. I make it a rule, whenever I can, to keep names as separate as they can be, preferably only one name with each initial letter (only one Axxx, one Bxxx, etc.) Also I would never use a name which can be confused with a status or position, for example, in a mediaeval romance I would never have a Mr. Lord, nor would I ever have a cleric whose title is Reverend and whose surname is Bishop. I have collected lists from Internet “baby names” sites and before I start a book I make a list of names for characters in the book, many of which have no assigned character at that stage. After I finish a book I usually have a lot of names left over, but that doesn’t matter – there will always be more needed in the next book.

The colours have a meaning: trivial changes are brown, more important are pink and my own personal advice is green. At the end of the text I add a clean copy of the text as I would like to see it, with all the comments cleared and the changes accepted, because complex changes are easier to understand like that.

And I ALWAYS say Please do not take these comments as anything other than my personal view. This is your story and you are entirely at liberty to ignore any or all of the following comments.

 

[Firebrain]

I use either track changes, or I write my comments in the text in bold as I go (I put the bit of text that I refer to in brackets, and I will sometimes develop a shorthand for a persistant problem e.g. "RP" -- repeated phrase). I don't actually change anything in the text when I do this;I tell them what they need to change and explain why. This is because I don't want to edit for people who make the same mistakes over and over.

For me, using a Lit editor is about the writer learning; I always learn from what I edit, and it should go two ways.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

... I don't want to edit for people who make the same mistakes over and over. ...

Best of luck with that wish ...

 

[Firebrain]

Best of luck with that wish ...

Heh. I have a couple of guys who I've edited for a year or so now and they've actually really improved. I love their stuff

 

[_Lynn_]

Best of luck with that wish ...

I thought the same thing.

 

[sr71plt]

I thought the same thing.

Yeah. I've been shipped books to edit by repeat authors several times. None of them have ever caught up with the bad habits and simple mistakes they habitually make.

If they did a great job of that, though, I wouldn't be paid to edit their books, so I just keep any irritation to myself.

 

[kinkybelle_bi]

Since I can't always rely on the author having MS Word, or being able to make sense of the track changes feature if they do, I have resorted to using [brackets] around my edits. This way they can do a Find and locate my changes, and when they're done checking them out they can do a search and replace to remove all the brackets. I will also add {#} tags if I want to make a comment, with the notes at the end.

For example

ORIGINAL:
I walled into the room she was naked on the bed. To her I gave a suggestive wink. With tender affection I slippd my weiner into her poop-shoot.

EDITED
I [walked] into the room[. She] was naked on the bed. []I gave [her] a suggestive wink. With tender affection[,] I slipped my weiner into her poop-shoot. {1}

{1} Might want to reconsider 'weiner' and 'poop-shoot' and use words more in keeping with the mood of your scene.

 

[_Lynn_]

Yeah. I've been shipped books to edit by repeat authors several times. None of them have ever caught up with the bad habits and simple mistakes they habitually make.

If they did a great job of that, though, I wouldn't be paid to edit their books, so I just keep any irritation to myself.

Very true.

The professor of the religion class I'm taking marked a citation I did as incorrect yesterday. I questioned him on it because I didn't see what was wrong. He messaged me today and said I was right. That felt good.

 

[_Lynn_]

Since I can't always rely on the author having MS Word, or being able to make sense of the track changes feature if they do, I have resorted to using [brackets] around my edits. This way they can do a Find and locate my changes, and when they're done checking them out they can do a search and replace to remove all the brackets. I will also add {#} tags if I want to make a comment, with the notes at the end.

For example

ORIGINAL:
I walled into the room she was naked on the bed. To her I gave a suggestive wink. With tender affection I slippd my weiner into her poop-shoot.

EDITED
I [walked] into the room[. She] was naked on the bed. []I gave [her] a suggestive wink. With tender affection[,] I slipped my weiner into her poop-shoot. {1}

{1} Might want to reconsider 'weiner' and 'poop-shoot' and use words more in keeping with the mood of your scene.

When I edit for someone without Word, I use red. They can see everything I did as soon as they open the document.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

Since I can't always rely on the author having MS Word, ...

I solve that by doing all the editing in Word and sending either a .rtf or a .htm file as produced by MSWord. Most people can read those. If they use OpenOffice the MSWord .doc is acceptable to my copy of OpenOffice so I send them a .odt version.

... or being able to make sense of the track changes feature if they do ...

Quite another problem. I'm harsh enough to think that they just have to learn to use what they have available, though I have never encountered this problem.

 

[culloden]

I'm not a Lit editor, just in RL. I find the Track Changes feature annoying to look at and to use. Instead, I place my [comments and suggested corrections] in brackets, in a blue font. I know red is the traditional color of the editor, but some authors are overwhelmed and discouraged to see a sea of red ink.

To strike out words in MSW, yet leave them visible, highlight the word, click "font," and in the box that comes up click "strikethrough." Whap, done.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm not a Lit editor, just in RL. I find the Track Changes feature annoying to look at and to use. Instead, I place my [comments and suggested corrections] in brackets, in a blue font. I know red is the traditional color of the editor, but some authors are overwhelmed and discouraged to see a sea of red ink.

To strike out words in MSW, yet leave them visible, highlight the word, click "font," and in the box that comes up click "strikethrough." Whap, done.

I guess you haven't been on the author side then, have you? (Or worked for a publisher who has the manuscript coming back to you for cleanup after the author has reviewed it.) With tracking change, you can accept/reject at a key stroke. Your method requires a lot of erasing and making sure the added color has been deleted from the manuscript. Tracking change is primarily for the benefit of the author--and for whoever has to do the cleanup.

Try both methods on a short piece. I think you'll quickly see the difference in time and effort to do author review/cleanup.

 

[culloden]

I guess you haven't been on the author side then, have you? (Or worked for a publisher who has the manuscript coming back to you for cleanup after the author has reviewed it.) With tracking change, you can accept/reject at a key stroke. Your method requires a lot of erasing and making sure the added color has been deleted from the manuscript. Tracking change is primarily for the benefit of the author--and for whoever has to do the cleanup.

Try both methods on a short piece. I think you'll quickly see the difference in time and effort to do author review/cleanup.

I've been on the author side (I have three books in the how-to genre with a major publisher, as well as dozens of magazine articles), and I've worked for magazine publishers for years. I agree that erasing the comments is easier with TC. But as both author and editor, I find that having embedded comments makes me go over the manuscript very closely - a good, if time consuming thing. And, while I work in Word, layout happens in InCopy, which deletes the formatting from Word when the document is imported. So, any missed issues with fonts go away.

It's all in your working style - What works for me may be torture for you.

 

[sr71plt]

I've been on the author side (I have three books in the how-to genre with a major publisher, as well as dozens of magazine articles), and I've worked for magazine publishers for years. I agree that erasing the comments is easier with TC. But as both author and editor, I find that having embedded comments makes me go over the manuscript very closely - a good, if time consuming thing. And, while I work in Word, layout happens in InCopy, which deletes the formatting from Word when the document is imported. So, any missed issues with fonts go away.

It's all in your working style - What works for me may be torture for you.

Tracking change doesn't prevent you from embedding comments. That's what I do too. I put them in brackets. And, again, they are easier to erase at a stroke in tracking change than manually erasing them is.

 

[PennLady]

I'm not a Lit editor, just in RL. I find the Track Changes feature annoying to look at and to use. Instead, I place my [comments and suggested corrections] in brackets, in a blue font. I know red is the traditional color of the editor, but some authors are overwhelmed and discouraged to see a sea of red ink.

To strike out words in MSW, yet leave them visible, highlight the word, click "font," and in the box that comes up click "strikethrough." Whap, done.

I've tried editing with this method and I find it very time consuming. I suppose some macros would help but I haven't gotten there. I don't mind myself whether the font is red or blue or anything else, and I'd be happy to adjust if anyone asked me.

I mean, for the strikethrough, you're talking at least 3-4 mouse clicks for that. That's not "whap, done" to me. Although you can shorten it with Ctrl-D, I guess.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Since I can't always rely on the author having MS Word, or being able to make sense of the track changes feature if they do, I have resorted to using [brackets] around my edits. This way they can do a Find and locate my changes, and when they're done checking them out they can do a search and replace to remove all the brackets. I will also add {#} tags if I want to make a comment, with the notes at the end.

For example

ORIGINAL:
I walled into the room she was naked on the bed. To her I gave a suggestive wink. With tender affection I slippd my weiner into her poop-shoot.

EDITED
I [walked] into the room[. She] was naked on the bed. []I gave [her] a suggestive wink. With tender affection[,] I slipped my weiner into her poop-shoot. {1}

{1} Might want to reconsider 'weiner' and 'poop-shoot' and use words more in keeping with the mood of your scene.

My style is similar. Not identical, but similar. Track Changes may be a great feature, but I used it once to great extent and the author, I'm guessing, didn't know what to do with it and ended up posting a story with none of my corrections made, but crediting me, and made me look bad. Brackets are better IMHO, easy to understand.

Not that I haven't seen one author post and be accepted with a few brackets left over <sigh>

Nothing is perfec. <yes, "t" left off for effect>

 

[sr71plt]

My style is similar. Not identical, but similar. Track Changes may be a great feature, but I used it once to great extent and the author, I'm guessing, didn't know what to do with it and ended up posting a story with none of my corrections made, but crediting me, and made me look bad. Brackets are better IMHO, easy to understand.

Not that I haven't seen one author post and be accepted with a few brackets left over <sigh>

Nothing is perfec. <yes, "t" left off for effect>

That's not a reason really to stop using tracking change. It's a reason to make sure the author knows what to do with it. (And I use bracketed ed notes with tracking change too. It's just easier for the author to clean up with tracking change that without.)