Finding the Right Editor For You

[Trombonus]

Ok, so, how do you guys go about finding editors? I went through the editor referrel thing on Lit's main site, but the editor I hooked up with didn't really help me too much. The best advice I got was from the people here at the AH, so I was hoping to get an editor here. Any suggestions or recommendations?

 

[Weird Harold]

Ok, so, how do you guys go about finding editors? I went through the editor referrel thing on Lit's main site, but the editor I hooked up with didn't really help me too much.

The last time I went looking for an editor, I didn't go looking for AN editor, I went looking for a minimum of five editors and preferably ten editors. In order to find that many responses from the Volunteer Editors, I had to e-mail about thirty editors.

 

[cloudy]

Place an inquiry on the editor's forum.

I would volunteer, but my life is so topsy turvy lately that I'm not very reliable at the mo.

 

[tanyachrs]

I personally would be annoyed to find that I'd put that much time into editing something that you were having other people edit as well. Maybe that's the sort of thing I should be asking before I edit anything. I may sleep around, but I always considered the writer/editor process to be one-on-one.

 

[Weird Harold]

I personally would be annoyed to find that I'd put that much time into editing something that you were having other people edit as well. Maybe that's the sort of thing I should be asking before I edit anything. I may sleep around, but I always considered the writer/editor process to be one-on-one.

I've found that no matter how many editors I use, they each find something different -- and that I'd better pay real close attention if they all agree on a problem.

An exclusive, one-on-one writer/editor relationship is too much like a co-author arrangement to me, although I can see your point as well. Editing is a lot of work and often under-appreciated, if not outright resented. However, what I need from editors simply can't be provided by a single editor and I make no secret about using more than one editor.

 

[The_Darkness]

One thing you might want to do is use two editors....one that hates you and one that likes you. For example, my two perfect editors from lit would be amicus and RedHairedandFriendly. Amicus and I practically spit blood at each other when in the same thread and Red and I get along swimmingly. Between the two you'd get a balance of what they don't like and what they do like as one should be overly harsh and the other probably overly generous.

 

[damppanties]

Ok, so, how do you guys go about finding editors? I went through the editor referrel thing on Lit's main site, but the editor I hooked up with didn't really help me too much. The best advice I got was from the people here at the AH, so I was hoping to get an editor here. Any suggestions or recommendations?

1. You're better off looking at people on the boards and PMing them directly to ask them if they can spare the time to edit your stuff. That way you get an editor you like and respect. Be sure to let them know the length of the story and the category it is in.

2. The Editor's Forum also works well.

3. Weird Harold's recommendation of mailing a lot of volunteer editors at the same time... but I personally think it's too much work reading their profiles and deciding on ones who will work for you and then they might not turn out to be the right ones. I've been lucky sometimes on the volunteer editor program, but I prefer (1).

 

[Weird Harold]

one that hates you and one that likes you.

On the advice of one of my first mentors, I do NOT want an editor that likes me! His definition of the perfect editor is "an anal-rententive English Major with a gurdge against you."

 

[RogueLurker]

On the advice of one of my first mentors, I do NOT want an editor that likes me! His definition of the perfect editor is "an anal-rententive English Major with a gurdge against you."

I would say that it really depends on personality and expectations. There's nothing to say that an editor can't remain objective and still be supportive and maintain a civil relationship. Red-lining a document and saying "this doesn't work" "this doesn't work" "this is crap" is one form of editing ... but, to me, feels rather hostile. Red-lining a document and explaining why something doesn't work, how it might fit better, what does works well and so on is another form of editing and feels more constructive.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I would ask other authors who they use and go by their recommendations. Try using different editors, changing it up, until you find someone who you fit with. (With whom you fit? See, that's why I need an editor! )

I highly recommend both RogueLurker and KBate, although both have backed off a little in the editing dept (as has LadyC, as we all know)... but it never hurts to ask. Also, CopyCarver and Techsan are good technical editors.

 

[Weird Harold]

On the advice of one of my first mentors, I do NOT want an editor that likes me! His definition of the perfect editor is "an anal-rententive English Major with a gurdge against you."

I would say that it really depends on personality and expectations. There's nothing to say that an editor can't remain objective and still be supportive and maintain a civil relationship. Red-lining a document and saying "this doesn't work" "this doesn't work" "this is crap" is one form of editing ... but, to me, feels rather hostile. Red-lining a document and explaining why something doesn't work, how it might fit better, what does works well and so on is another form of editing and feels more constructive.

An anal retentive English Major with a modicum of tact is a treasure not to be shared with anyone who might impinge on the time availble to edit MY work.

However, the point of that, obviously hyberbolic, definition is that you need an editor who is not worried about damaging a friendship or telling you when you're completely off track.

The best editors are as much teacher as editor and explain WHY they feel something needs to be corrected, but I'm at the point where I can usually see -- or deduce -- the reason without a detailed explanation. I'm also not afraid to ask for a clarification if I can't see a reason.

Everyone has different needs in an editor, but my mentor's point was that editor who isn't afraid to hurt your feelings will jump on any and every flaw in your writing and eliminating the flaws is what Editing is supposed to be about. An author needs to expect and be prepared to accept "bad news" when an editor returns their work.

 

[ungenderless]

I personally would be annoyed to find that I'd put that much time into editing something that you were having other people edit as well. Maybe that's the sort of thing I should be asking before I edit anything. I may sleep around, but I always considered the writer/editor process to be one-on-one.

That's...a little possessive.

 

[tanyachrs]

I don't need to own either the writer or the work and I'm not looking to collaborate. I simply don't want to waste my time. I'm very thorough when I edit and I do line editing, not opinion offering, so I guess I don't like the idea of spending hours finding the same typos someone else is finding.

If you send something to one editor, make the suggested changes (as accepted by you), and then send it to another for a second set of eyes, I can see that, but if I'm just one of a herd doing the same thing at the same time, I'll bow out. Thanks to this thread I'll know to ask in the future. I didn't realize simultaneous submissions to multiple editors were common.

 

[ungenderless]

I'm very thorough when I edit and I do line editing, not opinion offering, so I guess I don't like the idea of spending hours finding the same typos someone else is finding.

Oh well, see, I didn't realize that you meant specifically and only line editing. To me, I send stories to multiple editors to get multiple perspectives on a story. Cos my story is going to get read by several types of people, so I want to hear what several types of people think of it before-hand. But if someone's awesome at fixing all grammatical errors, then that person would always be the final person whom I sent the story to, after all conceptual changes have been made.

 

[Weird Harold]

Thanks to this thread I'll know to ask in the future. I didn't realize simultaneous submissions to multiple editors were common.

I don't know that simultaneous submissions to editors is all that common -- there is a reason that "weird" is part of my handle. "Serial Monogamy" is probably much more common among those who use multiple editors.

I use simultaneous editors because I've found that using sequential editors often results in one editor "undoing" the recommendation of a previous editor. By submiting the same draft to all editors I avoid that problem and because I combine all of the edited version into a single file with tracked changes I can compare the changes each editor makes and resolve conflicts just once.

 

[damppanties]

... I combine all of the edited version into a single file with tracked changes I can compare the changes each editor makes and resolve conflicts just once.

I'd probably lose my mind if I tried that.

 

[Weird Harold]

... I combine all of the edited version into a single file with tracked changes

I'd probably lose my mind if I tried that.

It isn't nearly as confusing as it sounds -- as I noted earlier, editors almost never find the same problems so there aren't really all that many times there conflicting recommendations to resolve. Most of the time, where multiple editors DO find the same problem it's an egregious typo that I should have caught before sending it out to be edited.

 

[Trombonus]

Yeah last time I made the mistake of picking one editor and sticking with them, though I contacted a few. This time I'm hoping to send it to a few different people, and preferably not someone who'll just go through with the spelling and grammar checker and be done with it. lol, I do that myself. I did put in a request at the Editors forum, and I've since had a couple offers to edit it. (A big thank you to those people, you know who you are).

I definitely agree with damppanties in her suggestions, which is why I posted here first. I got my best advice from the AH, after I'd originally posted my first story. The whole editors section in the main Lit site took too long for me to go through, so I'm trying to avoid that if possible.

On a side note, I decided to post my story un-edited, mostly due to a lack of patience, but I'm still looking for editors to basically educate myself. Can't get better if you don't learn from your mistakes.

My story was in the Non-Human category BTW.

 

[Fallenfromgrace]

I have so far used one editor- RogueLurker, and i love her style.

As someone who is a) not an english student b) gets wrapped up in my story as if its only for me i found the guidance an absolute godsend. I am really really really happy with my part 1 of my piece in comparison to the original. RL not only went through my grammar, but suggested how various parts might be worded differently.

I feel i have learnt a lot, and that towards the end of the process i was apparently self editing very well. I am applying all that i have learnt to future sections of the piece so as to grow in myself (yes yes that doesnt make sense i know!) and cut down her work load lol...

RL recomended of her own volition that i seek the opinion of more than one editor, and i am in the process of doing that. I think its important to get different editorial opinions because you're going to have a wide target audience- some like romantica, some like stroke, some like character development, some don't care and just want to get to the juicy stuff.

It also depends on the genre of your piece as well- i know some editors have an editing preference- whether it be BDSM or Gay Male etc.

 

[tanyachrs]

I've found that using sequential editors often results in one editor "undoing" the recommendation of a previous editor.

Perhaps that's why I don't like the idea of being one of many. I always tell the author that they're free to accept or reject any change I offer but what's the point of going through something with a fine tooth comb if my work is going to be undone by the next guy who comes along? Am I going to get a chance to defend my correction and explain why it's correct? No, the last person to offer a suggestion will win. Line editing shouldn't be a democratic voting process.

Opinions on the story, plot, characterization - that's a different thing. I think you'd call that critique, not editing. Back in the old days, editors did work with writers in that way but they weren't one of many when they did it. The editor and writer in that case were a team.

 

[Weird Harold]

Am I going to get a chance to defend my correction and explain why it's correct? No, the last person to offer a suggestion will win. Line editing shouldn't be a democratic voting process.

Depends on who you're editing for. I probably wouldn't need an explanation or defense unless it was some obsure point of grammar or punctuation. I prefer siimultaneous edits precisely because there is no "last vote," only alternatives to choose from.

Opinions on the story, plot, characterization - that's a different thing. I think you'd call that critique, not editing. Back in the old days, editors did work with writers in that way but they weren't one of many when they did it. The editor and writer in that case were a team.

No, I'd call opinions and recommendations about the story, plot, characterization, "Story Editing" as opposed to "Copy Editing" and/or "Proofreading."

I generally don't need much "copy editing" -- what you call "Line Editing" -- what I want from editors is primarily "Story Editing."

When it comes to Proofreading -- checking for typos and a final check of punctuation and formatting -- I'm of the opinion that the more eyes, the better; but there comes a point of diminishing returns in that search for perfection. the readers will always spot something every possible editorial process missed.

The key is that I try to be as clear as possible what kind of "edit" I'm looking for at any given point in the process.

 

[Munachi]

hm, i tried the editor forum once, and must admit i was a bit disappointed...

 

[tanyachrs]

No, I'd call opinions and recommendations about the story, plot, characterization, "Story Editing" as opposed to "Copy Editing" and/or "Proofreading."

"Story editing" does seem to be what most people on Lit mean by editing. Other sites I've been on would call that a critique but I'm new here and still learning. I guess the main thing is to communicate - both in terms of what you're looking for and what you're willing to offer. I've learned to check before doing any "copy editing" or "proofreading" that I'm not one of many. I've also learned that most people aren't looking for my version of "editing" so I apologize to anyone who has felt short changed.

 

[RogueLurker]

Thanks for the kind words, Selena and Fallen.

An anal retentive English Major with a modicum of tact is a treasure not to be shared with anyone who might impinge on the time availble to edit MY work.

However, the point of that, obviously hyberbolic, definition is that you need an editor who is not worried about damaging a friendship or telling you when you're completely off track.

The best editors are as much teacher as editor and explain WHY they feel something needs to be corrected, but I'm at the point where I can usually see -- or deduce -- the reason without a detailed explanation. I'm also not afraid to ask for a clarification if I can't see a reason.

Everyone has different needs in an editor, but my mentor's point was that editor who isn't afraid to hurt your feelings will jump on any and every flaw in your writing and eliminating the flaws is what Editing is supposed to be about. An author needs to expect and be prepared to accept "bad news" when an editor returns their work.

Agreed ...
Once you've had a chance to learn each others styles, quite often the explanations become less detailed. Communication, trust and respect between both parties are all important in the editing process ... otherwise why would you be interested in giving/recieving opinons or assistance.

"Story editing" does seem to be what most people on Lit mean by editing. Other sites I've been on would call that a critique but I'm new here and still learning. I guess the main thing is to communicate - both in terms of what you're looking for and what you're willing to offer. I've learned to check before doing any "copy editing" or "proofreading" that I'm not one of many. I've also learned that most people aren't looking for my version of "editing" so I apologize to anyone who has felt short changed.

You're right in that communication is key ... on both the editor's and the author's parts. I've had my share of edits that people were looking for proofreading or just even a "damn that was hot" comment ... which means a lot of effort went into something that wasn't really going to be useful to the author.

 

[Weird Harold]

You're right in that communication is key ... on both the editor's and the author's parts. I've had my share of edits that people were looking for proofreading or just even a "damn that was hot" comment ... which means a lot of effort went into something that wasn't really going to be useful to the author.

I don't edit any more for a variety of reasons, but when I did I made a point of sending a "preliminary edit" back to the client after editing the first page or two to confirm that a) they could use MS Word's commenting and change tracking features and b) I was doing what they wanted in an edit.

I'm pretty much constitutionally incapable of anything less than a "Full Edit," commenting on spelling, punctuation, word choice, dialogue, sentence structure, readability, Paragraph breaks, continuity and anything else that I notice about a story. I encountered a few authors that didn't appreciate that kind of detail, but most of them did -- regardless of what they thought they wanted from an editor to begin with.

However, I must note that I seldom had any repeat customers -- whether that was because I taught them how to write better so they didn't need that kind of detailed editing or because they "couldn't stand the heat" I don't know.