Authors usually hire an editor to check the punctuation and spelling of their books, often to comment on plot and character, but beyond “fix my manuscript” a lot of authors don’t pay much attention to what their editors can do for them. As someone blessed to work with several good editors, and knowing the type of editor I want to be for my clients, I thought I’d attempt to address this question. Because to me, the author-editor relationship goes far beyond just correcting typos.
An editor should suggest improvements, not demand them.
The truth is the author is always the final arbiter of what goes into their manuscript. The goal is to have the author look at the corrections and most of the time agree with them and make them. But there may be times when an author looks at a suggested change and knows it wouldn’t work for the characters or the story. It is the author’s job to justify this to an editor if they’re working within a publishing house, but then that brings me to number two.
An editor should always have the author’s back.
In a publishing house situation where the book passes through many hands, and with the publishers I’ve worked with the editor has been the one shepherding it through the process, an editor should always listen to the author’s rationalization and be willing to back them up when necessary. An editor who doesn’t do that, or who simply requires that each step of the process make the changes, risks turning the book not into the product of the author’s imagination that’s been improved by the publishing process (which is how it should always be), rather than imposing the editor’s will upon the author.
An editor should educate with the goal to helping the author be better.
I’ll look at the flip side of this blog next week, but my proudest moments as an editor have been when I’ve seen authors grow in their craft, where each book improves upon the last. If an editor can take a few moments to educate, perhaps about a grammatical nuance or maybe about a way of handling a scene, then I believe the editor should do that.
An editor should always be coach and cheerleader.
Now this doesn’t mean, provided the relationship is developed enough for it, that an editor can’t pass out some tough, but gentle, love in the editing department. But first and foremost, the editor should be on the author’s team, never working for another side. Even editors within publishing houses can advocate for their authors within the structure of the publishing house.
The truth is, especially in a publishing house environment, the editor may very well be the only person the author has contact with, and there’s another layer of separation if an agent is involved. If the editor isn’t wiling to advocate for an author, then who is?
In the independent publishing space, authors have a lot of choice about who they use to edit their books. And most editors I see online and am connected with through social media, would agree with me about what I’ve said here. As an author, you should be looking for more than someone to fix your typos. You should be looking for someone to help you improve your writing, because you’re learning every time they touch your manuscript.