Editors and Writers discussion
When hiring editors.,,which is better?
date
newest »
newest »
Depends what you want to get out of it. If you want it done professionally, pay the money to get it done properly. If you want different opinions you can still get quality work from cheaper editors, and take the best from each. Probably the most important part is to take advantage of free samples, so that you can see which editor's work you prefer. That will also help you work out who is cheap because they are terrible and who is cheap simply because they are inexperienced. It will also help you work out if the professional is worth paying that extra for.
Wow, Cheryl. I was going to give you the short answer, but there isn't one. So here's the long one: The writer needs to consider her needs carefully and recruit the appropriate people to meet those needs.Example 1: Writer is working on a nonfiction book in which he has some expertise, but isn't sure about how to structure it. He might want to consult a development editor.
Example 2: Writer has written a novel, but wonders if it's too long/too short, whether it is good enough to publish, etc. She might want to find a workshop, group, beta reader, or coach to help her get a better handle on the novel writing process. It may be too early to bring in an editor, though there are fiction editors willing to offer general feedback to a writer even at this early stage.
Example 3: Writer has written a book, run it through the gauntlet of wife, mother, second best friend, guy next door, local public library writers workshop, and spellcheck and feels his novel is ready for the big time. He needs an editor.
Even at this point, it may be hard for the writer to determine the level of service her book needs. My recommendation is to put a post up on at least one reliable editorial marketplace; compile a list of editors whose credentials appeal to you; and request a sample edit and a quote. Chances are the writer will have to choose between two or three editors who seem to be a good fit. Price may be the deciding factor, or sometimes a personal interview over the phone can help make a decision.
As with anything, the more you can do yourself, the less you will need to engage someone else. Use a dictionary. Review the basic rules of grammar. Be humble when asking people for free feedback, and consider the advice of readers. If you want a professional to do a lot of work, be willing to pay them for it. Having said that, the typical writer needs a development/copy editor--someone who will not only find the spelling/grammar/punctuation errors but also structural problems, issues with characterization and pacing. A really good editor will help you develop your style and narrative voice and sharpen your writing chops. If you can find a good one, you don't need to pay for alternates.
There are two other services a writer may want to consider. Sometimes workshops and relatives are not a good option, in which case, the writer may want to pay for a beta read or manuscript appraisal. This is NOT a copy edit but merely an objective opinion on the condition and merits of your book. It can be a valuable help in determining any necessary slicing and dicing the book may need. After the copy editing is done and the manuscript is in its final draft, a proofreader is a definite nice-to-have. This last fresh pair of eyes will spot the slippery little typos that got so far (yes, there will be a few) and also, hopefully, any weird splices or distortions resulting from a glitch in the copy edit--for example, paragraphs that were accidentally truncated or the products of incomplete edits such as "it was were the best of times" that happen even with the best of editors.
What I strongly advise against is shopping for an editor based on price and then casting your novel before three cheap editors. Mostly likely the result will be as scattershot as the approach. Neither should you expect an outcome based on price. You can pay a lot of money for a bad fit, or discover a wonderful editor whose rate is well within your budget. Use sample edits to find a good editor you will enjoy working with, and pay gladly for the highly skilled service.
Cheryl,Longhare's comments are spot on. Another danger with hiring a few editors is that you may get three opinions that are so divergent that you won't know where to turn. A situation like that can really make your head spin!
And, especially if you are hiring a developmental editor, take the time not only to get a sample edit, but also to talk with the editor. You need to work with someone with whom you are simpatico, who will approach you and your work in a manner that suits your style. Don't hire someone laid-back if you know you respond most constructively to a drill sergeant. Do you want an editor who will point out the strengths as well as the weaknesses or someone who will only mark what needs revision? Are you looking for someone who will read through your entire manuscript before you hear from that person again or do you want someone who will available for consultation or coaching as you revise? If you don't know what you want, talk it out here a bit.
Ruth
Robyn wrote: "Hire someone with experience. If it isn't done right the first time you'll have to pay so it to be done again, costing you twice as much money"If it's not done right the first time, a) yes, question the editor's skills, but b) demand either a refund or a re-examination from the editor.
Tony
www.jefferson-franklin.co.uk
"If it's not done right the first time,..."Tony, yes, if you buy a can opener and it doesn't work, you can easily return it as defective. But how can a writer know if an edit is a bad job?
A publisher can fairly assess a bad edit, but a writer really depends on the expertise of the editor and often can only judge whether they are happy or unhappy with the result--which is not sufficient grounds for demanding a refund.
A writer may be very happy with an inferior edit, not knowing how cursory the job was or whether the editor, in fact, has the skills to do a thorough job. It would not be acceptable, however, for a writer to avert this situation by hiring three editors and then pay only the one who seemed to do the best job. This is the purpose of sample edits.
A heavy handed editor may practically rewrite a novel to enforce strict rules, leaving the writer, whose narrative voice has been obliterated, deeply unhappy. In these cases, my heart is with the disappointed writer, but in defense of the editor, he or she put in a lot of hours doing highly skilled labor--and very few freelance editors charge for all the hours they actually put into a job. Caveat emptor. Hire someone whose work you have reviewed, whose personality meshes with yours, be clear about what you want, and ask for a contract so there can be no confusion about what is expected.
A disappointed writer should review all correspondence (written, not verbal) and consider fairly whether they paid for a service that was not done according to a mutual understanding. There is nothing wrong with the writer discussing concerns with the editor before releasing payment, but refusing payment or demanding a refund for work that was done in good faith is never acceptable.
All that you say is true, Longhare. I think as you say that's probably the point of an increasing number of editors offering free sample edits: so you can try before you buy - and try a whole bunch - before seeing which one has the right blend for your project; the blend of scrupulous "comma-squashing" proof-reading and a sympathetic feel for the work, the market and the work's appeal to agents and readers.We've been offering sample chapter edits since we started our company, and I think that's surely a line when choosing an editor - if they're prepared to show you what they do before you give them any money, you lose nothing by seeing what they can do, and you should be under no obligation to them.
On the question of work done in good faith - yes, there's a line there too. If an author finds the edits done to be diminishing their voice or changing it into something with which they're not comfortable, there should be an explanation of why the changes were made. If the editor can give a reasonable explanation of why the changes were made, even if the author doesn't LIKE the changes, then yes, good faith is proven. I've only had one case of that to deal with since we started, when one of my then junior editors (in good faith) assumed from the writing style a work was aimed at a particular market, when it turned out to be aimed at a different market. The author wasn't happy with the edit, but accepted the good faith in which the work was done. Bottom line if there are reasons why the author feels the edit was done in something other than good faith, the reasons should be able to stand up, and in that case, assuming the editor hasn't OFFERED a refund or re-appraisal, the author should be able to demand one based on the stand-up reasons for their feeling.
Most stand-up editor would probably prefer to lose the fee for one edit than suffer a dent in their reputation for good faith.
Tony
www.jefferson-franklin.co.uk
Tony wrote: "All that you say is true, Longhare. I think as you say that's probably the point of an increasing number of editors offering free sample edits: so you can try before you buy - and try a whole bunch..."Tony, that's a great explanation for writers looking for an editor. I'm glad Cheryl posted this thread. It's full of sound advice.
Was wondering this the other day, so wanted some opinions. LOL