How to Cope When Your MS Gets a Heavy Edit
Is my writing really that bad?
Image credit: Andrea Piacquadio from Pexels
There's nothing quite like writing creatively. Letting it all out of your brain, putting it on paper, and revising until it resembles perfection.
With the confidence that can only come from naiveté, you hand it over to an editor for "a quick proof."
Sucker.
Editing comes in many forms (see “What Type of Editing Do I Need?”), and I’ve come to the realization that there truly is an editor for every bit of writing, from cereal boxes and game boards to the snootiest bit of purple prose. And yet, when I talk to people before doing a sample edit/evaluation, I’m often surprised at how many believe their MS only needs what they consider a “proofread.”
Managing unrealistic expectations
As I’ve gained more years of editing experience, I realize that those writers who think they need the most help are rarely the ones who have the most errors.
The serious writer—often the more experienced writer, but not always—rewrites scenes, strengthens verbs, asks for and accepts constructive critique, and checks to make sure the writing engages all the senses. They’re passionate about their craft and work hard to produce the best product possible.
On the contrary, there are always those writers who feel they have a masterpiece on their hands when they finish the first draft. And those are usually the ones who feel the quick once-over is all they need. After all, editing is just checking for typos, right?
Editing is more than fixing typos
I am here to report that most manuscripts need more than a passing glance. Indeed, copyeditors can't afford to gloss over the manuscripts entrusted to our care. If we do our jobs properly, we read every word, multiple times.
The funny thing about reading each word is that it allows us to notice things. Sometimes there are a lot of errors, and sometimes only a few, but even the most careful writer makes mistakes. It's just the way it goes. And typos or misspellings are only a small percentage of those mistakes.
Depending on the type of editing you need, your editor may provide a writeup with no marking of your MS, or edits within the doc using tracked changes, or even a combination of the two.
And that makes the typical copyedit looks worse than it is, with all that red ink standing out so starkly against the black and white.
Your editor isn’t out to get you
You'll just have to trust me when I say copyeditors—well, most of them, anyway—don't take sadistic pleasure in marking up manuscripts. I know I don't. There's a satisfaction that comes from knowing I'm helping someone's work to look its best, but when there are a lot of corrections to make, my feelings run more toward the nervous side.
Will the author think I'm taking liberties that aren't mine to take? Will he resent my advice? Will she wonder if I really know what I'm talking about? Am I being too bossy?
With the love/hate relationship so many authors have with the editorial process, it's tough to do a thorough job without having someone's feelings hurt on occasion. Sometimes it just boils down to whether the writer is sensitive to criticism or whether they see the changes as necessary for betterment of the work. Or maybe they’ve just had a rotten day.
When all is said and done, I hope the writer recognizes that I've made suggestions that will improve the manuscript. Seeing "all that red ink" may come as a shock, but as long as they know I have their best interests in mind, the red is just a little ol' lipstick kiss in a soon-to-be-great manuscript.
Changing your settings may soften the blow
After one of my authors told me he'd rather see less red, I changed my settings in Word so that anything I delete is in gray—a nice, soothing sort of invisibility, a.k.a. "let’s see if it looks better without this." Anything I add is in turquoise, because it’s pleasant. Of course, each author needs to change those settings in their own MS Word to get the benefit, but I’ve found I like it for my own eye strain issues.
At least there is less red on the page, right? Goal achieved. Go ahead; try it and see if your anxiety level drops.
Margin comments can be a lifesaver
I work directly with authors, and I love that. Those who have worked with me know I'm a big fan of margin notes. They’re such an easy means of communication between me and the author during the editing process, other than email. I can write things as I think of them, where they apply, so I don't have to save it all for an email summary.
Sometimes I'll explain why I've changed something that may not have seemed incorrect; other times, I'll explain an odd rule, like the "sometimes hyphenated, sometimes not" words; or I’ll suggest a change that isn’t be a must-do item but is one I think can improve the sentence.
At other times, I just want to show my appreciation for a nicely written passage or a funny exchange between characters. There’s nothing wrong with using the margin to tell the author if a passage made me laugh or cry—I think authors need to know their humor actually hits the spot they're aiming for, or if I felt them bleed their emotions onto the page.
But how much editing is too much?
There are times when there's so much red (or turquoise) on the page that every new comment feels like "the" comment. This is the one that's going to break him. This is the one that will put her over the edge. It's just too much.
I've had this happen on occasion, and I always feel terrible about it. But when all is said and done, I can't do less than the job I was hired to do, and if that means a lot of revisions, then that's what the manuscript needs.
I do try to stress that I’m always open to answering questions, and that it’s always worth a discussion if something doesn’t feel or sound right.
A good guideline is to look, as objectively as possible, at the changes that were made or suggested, and take each one as an individual issue. Don’t look at the overall bunch of changes. Look at one sentence. If it shows a subjective change, did that revision make the sentence sound better? Did it feel like a change for change’s sake? Does it sound worse? (Sadly, that happens once in a while.)
As editors we try really hard to make sure we’re not inserting ourselves into someone else’s work. Changes should be necessary and purposeful. “I just hate slang words” is not a good reason to change up the writer’s dialogue passages. “This word was not in use yet during this era” is a good reason to flag it.
The goal is to make things better and to never sound mean. In fact, if I've gone through a frustrating edit, I tend to wait a day or two before sending them off (barring any deadline issues), reread all my margin notes, "nice" them up a bit if needed, and then proceed with returning the MS.
So what’s the trick?
What's the best way to deal with a lot of red ink? I have to admit that I still don't really know. Get in the right frame of mind, remove distractions, and remember we intend good, not harm. All I can do is keep doing the job, explaining as I go, and hope the writer accepts that the changes are necessary if the book is to become its best.
Tell me about you. Have you had someone treat your manuscript as if it's their own, rewriting things the way they'd say them? Have you had an editor who made you feel inept? Or have your red-ink moments been a positive thing for you?
