# .



## iwfwil (Feb 20, 2014)

.


----------



## Evan of the R. (Oct 15, 2013)

Brava!


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

I think I love you.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

We've had this thread many times before. When I wrote for newspapers and websites, I was expected to self-edit my work so it was error free. I don't know why fiction writing has to feel like it's a special snowflake . . .

 

Certainly, the sheer volume of words is a concern. But there are many strategies and ways for authors to self-edit. If you're new to editing your own work, definitely have someone else check it over until you are more practiced in judging the result. James Scott Bell has a book on Self-editing, I have the paperback version. It has many great tips in there, not for copyediting, but for EDITING. Asking yourself questions like "What if you cut the first chapter off, does the story become more exciting?" Really good stuff in there. It's just called Revision & Self-editing and it's in KU.

I don't self-edit only anymore merely as a time saver and to keep my stupid monkey critic in my head bound in duct tape and in the corner where she belongs. But before my books were making enough money to support that, and therefore allow me to write more, faster, I self-edited Cancelled.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Right, I know I was an early prawn that said "I self-edit" and the "No, Never, go sit in author time out" people came out en masse .  

I was just trying to be honest about my process. I can't sit here and claim I only self-edit anymore because I do have an editor and a copyeditor. But I have them not because my writing can't be self-edited, but as part of my team to help us be harder, better, faster, stronger.  Many authors might find they get to that level, and when I HAD to self-edit, I thought I'd never hire out as a time saver. But that happened to me . . . so just wanted to say it can happen.

But even though I hire out, my business partner (she developmentally edits, first reader, etc) works for a stake in the book's success. That's not a deal most would recommend, but I've worked well with this woman for 3+ years. We have a relationship. If I ever go down in the history books as a prolific commercial fiction writer when I'm old and gray, it will be with the factoid that "Elizabeth had great support and assistance from her business partner and editor who liked to stay out of the limelight. The two women would regularly laugh and spend hours talking about the stories, then Elizabeth would write them and April would prune. Ms. West credits her success after 2014 directly to the teamwork atmosphere she and April enjoyed, making each manuscript a fun project for the two friends to bond over." 

My copyeditor's fee is something I imposed. She only wanted a signed paperback and I said you need a little more than that.  It's still not much because I do have to control costs, but it works out to roughly 10% of each book's first month's sales cover the copyediting costs and that's a one time fee.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

MeganBryce said:


> Me: *Editing, like writing, is a skill. It can be learned.*












Thank you for this, Megan. Can't be stressed enough.

(Related--Self-Editing for Fiction Writers--go check it out if you haven't already, people. Even if you do use an editor, it'll help you write cleaner manuscripts.)


----------



## D. Zollicoffer (May 14, 2014)

Jim Johnson said:


> Thank you for this, Megan. Can't be stressed enough.
> 
> (Related--Self-Editing for Fiction Writers--go check it out if you haven't already, people. Even if you do use an editor, it'll help you write cleaner manuscripts.)


I second this, best writing book I own!

I edit my novellas, but I'm going to send my novels off to an editor to save time. I'd rather write something else and let them look at it for a week.

But I agree with the OP. Hiring an editor isn't always necessary.


----------



## Guest (Dec 11, 2014)

I agree you can do a good self-editing and proofing job of your own work yourself, but it takes more time. The number one trick for me is to set the work aside so I can detach from it. The longer I do so, the more problems and errors become apparent. I read my work aloud, but I definitely will try the text-to-speech trick. I also review a grammar book and other reference books  before that final edit. The last step is to read the book backward.

I think a good copy editor would be nice and save time, but it isn't in the budget--yet.


----------



## Drake (Apr 30, 2014)

Thanks for a great post!  Everyone has to work in the way they are most comfortable, and what works for one writer shouldn't become required for the rest.  I self-edit, and like you, I feel that I'm getting better at it all the time.  Congratulations on your success.


----------



## aimeeeasterling (Sep 22, 2014)

The only editing I pay for is copyediting, at around $250 to $300 per book. I didn't used to pay for even that, and due to my obsessive self-editing (I'm working through my sixth and final draft of my WIP  now), I don't really need it. My copy editor usually only finds a couple of dozen mistakes in an entire novel, and I suspect that's few enough that I wouldn't have gotten bad reviews for them. Plus, I always read over one more time after getting revisions from the copy editor, so it's likely I would have caught at least half of the errors she noticed on that last read through for myself.

So why do I pay for copy editing? Since the books make back the money pretty quickly, I figure it's worth it for my peace of mind. But if my books weren't breaking even within the first month or two, I'd definitely go back to entirely self-editing. I'm a skinflint, so each book definitely has to pay for itself...fast. If I was concerned, I'd send my finished manuscript to a couple of friends to read before publishing. I agree that it's quite possible to write a clean novel without any paid help.


----------



## JR. (Dec 10, 2014)

MeganBryce said:


> it's $1000 and everyone KNOWS you have to have an editor


Wow! As soon as I publish (and self-edit) my work, I'll be on the trail for editing work.

I have been looking at a lot of early manuscripts the past couple of months, though, and I can see why people get told they 'need' an editor. Those that don't need it don't need telling, so it's more effective to lay a blanket 'do it' over everything to save hassle.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

I self-edit and get flamed here and on Goodreads for saying so. I also once worked with a funeral director who did his own embalming and was not trained. A former member here liked to shout a lot about treating your writing like a business and neither he nor the posse like to hear the obvious riposte - I am and that is why I refuse to give £1000 to a wannabe who knows 10% of what I know about writing for the sake of a book that would be lucky to make £500.

I wonder if the posse hunted down a younger Hugh Howey in his self-editing days.


----------



## Heather Hamilton-Senter (May 25, 2013)

My first book is self edited with help from 4 really good beta readers. One of the best is my 13 year old daughter who can find a mistake in anything! I have comments in even negative reviews that they can't find issues with the editing. It's a skill that can be learned - and you do still need help from new eyes I think - but it does take time. I'm transitioning into using an editor as a time saving technique, and also so I don't need to rely on people who have their own lives and businesses to worry about and might not always be available to beta....


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Thanks for this post, Megan. I do my own editing too, but I think the most important point you made can't be stressed enough: the editing has to be done. Do not put out a badly edited book or you'll look unprofessional. Get a professional to do it if you have to, as you will need an eagle eye to do it yourself, but it can be done.

As it happens, my system is similar to yours, although I do the read-through on the Kindle for the story and egregious grammar/spelling errors as the first pass. After that I do a read on paper of the whole thing - you'd be surprised how much that picks up, and then as my third stage I listen to it on text-to-speech, which I can't recommend enough, although you do have to try not to fall asleep.

I've also sold a lot of books and have over 750 reviews, not one of which contains the words "typo" or "crap editing".


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Mercia McMahon said:


> I also once worked with a funeral director who did his own embalming and was not trained.


Now _that's_ clever.


----------



## Kenzi (Jul 28, 2014)

If it works for you, it works for you. That's the beauty of this business.


----------



## Cege Smith (Dec 11, 2011)

I think this was a great post. There are a couple of themes that this all boils down to in my mind:

Everybody agrees that editing is necessary. You shouldn't throw a first draft up on Amazon and expect anything but an outpouring of 1-star reviews dinging you for editing/typos (assuming anyone buys your book at all).

There is a time vs. money equation that each author has to evaluate for their own business. If I have funds, but not a lot of time, I'd consider outsourcing some or all of the editing. If I have time, but no funds, then it's likely I'll self-edit. If there's a deficit on both- I should wait until I have a surplus of one or the other before publishing.

In order to properly edit, there needs to be a process. Everyone's process can be different. Self-edit, hire an editor, use betas/critique partners- whatever. There should be some kind of feedback loop that you can then utilize to change or make adjustments to your process.

About a year into my self-publishing journey, I got frustrated because I was getting dinged in reviews for typos/grammar after paying an editor to review that work, and so I didn't feel as if I was getting a return on the investment for that money spent. (It was around $300 for 65,000 words at the time.) I had more time than money at that point. So I took the process in-house and told myself that I'd revise my process if I started getting feedback that my own editing wasn't up to par.

Since then, I've added beta readers to my process because it creates a level of comfort for me. I like having another set of eyes on my stories. Plus, one of my betas should be charging for what she does because she catches everything. Going back to the idea of a feedback loop to determine if what I'm doing is working- two of those titles went up on NetGalley and I didn't receive the first review that dinged me for editing issues. (And those readers are even more critical than the Goodreads folks.)

It's your business, so you get to decide where your comfort level is with any points in the process that are "risky". What works today won't necessarily work tomorrow. Be flexible. Leverage the power of what we have at our fingertips today and put out the best quality work that you can. Keep the feedback loops open.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

THANK YOU.

I self-edit, too, with the help of really awesome beta readers. Someday, I would love to have an editor who I can just churn things out to, but right now, it's not in the budget.


----------



## Ronny K (Aug 2, 2011)

Much respect to your accomplishments. There's no doubt that you don't have to dish out $$$ at editors in order to move ebooks (and satisfy customers).

However, I think a lot of people get some concepts confused:

Grammar and typos are probably the most minor, insignificant aspect of editing. Those really fall under proofreading. I don't care much for semantics, but I think it's important to distinguish, because developmental editing is the true value of having an editor. When I'm editing someone's work, I read in a completely different way than when I'm proofreading. I think it's invaluable to have someone with fresh eyes to call attention to your plot structure, character development, general style and tone, etc. Things that the Chicago Manual can't help with. Yes, a beta reader can call attention to these things, but the idea is that editors are trained professionals. They know craft, they know the market, they should know what works, what CAN work, what CAN'T work, etc.

A good editor will also help you with syntax, word choice, and the minutiae--even grammar. I just struggle with the term "self-editing." A writer writes a manuscript, then he/she revises it, and revises it, and revises it. That's just writing. Changing a sentence you've already written isn't Editing. That's just Writing, IMO.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

It boils down to the OP can't afford an editor.  What all self-editors miss is the insight of a third-party. it's that insight that can transform from mediocre to brilliant. 

That's what you are paying for. And those of us that pay editors often say to ourselves - 

"You cheeky bastid -but you're right."

Worth every penny.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

That's an oversimplification EC. There are writers who can afford an editor and choose to keep the money to themselves, but they won't say so in a public forum and be casted as greedy. 

I pay my editors more for their worth in moral support than trying to take my writing to some brilliant level, honestly. I'm an author that wishes so desperately writing was a team sport. Hence why I waste so much time on forums when I should *ahem* be writing/revising my raw words to make them sparkle. In other realms of writing, everything comes down to the writer to make the piece the best it can be. For whatever reason, fiction writing decided as a sub-group to make new rules. 

Just paying for an editor does not magically make a manuscript any better. It comes down to the talent of the team. Some writers are solo athletes, some perform on a team. It's not about the money but how one wishes to play the game.


----------



## Christa Wick (Nov 1, 2012)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> We've had this thread many times before. When I wrote for newspapers and websites, I was expected to self-edit my work so it was error free. I don't know why fiction writing has to feel like it's a special snowflake . . .
> ...


Yep! I wrote daily for high-level paywall content that is now part of Bloomberg (and was its own, highly respected, national brand before that). New writers were reviewed for each article/treatise update for up to the first three months. Although, if you were still being reviewed heavily in that last month, you were probably getting a good-bye slip. Overall, I did over a decade in that kind of environment, working both as a writer (who had to self-edit) and editor, with a C-suite audience, the majority of which were people who had graduate and post-graduate degrees from all the prestigious schools. (And those type-A overachievers aren't my audience as a romance writer.)

I've seen self-pubbers use editors who don't even know proper grammar and punctuation. So a lot of good that did the writer.

Then there's the (at least partial) myth that "editors" in trad publishing actually edit. They are more the equivalent of art directors in today's publishing world: evaluate the talent, pitch the talent to marketing, sign the talent, give the talent change notes based on personal bias or what the marketing department thinks will sell best, etc. Ever so rarely do they spot genuine problems. But, because there can be so many change notes, writers think their initial manuscript was lacking and that they need their editor.


----------



## Rue Hirsch (May 4, 2014)

Hi, thank you for posting this thread. I also self-edit and I'm not ashamed to say so. The self-editing book posted on a link here is AMAZING and I highly recommend that--if you're interested in doing your own editing--to read that book.

I have two strong critique partners and a handful of beta readers who aren't shy about laying it on me. I love that and appreciate their honesty. How else will my work improve? No feelings attached during the editing process. Its all business. The work is becoming stronger, clearer, and more alive. I detest editing and it takes me forever, the time in which I could be using to write a new work. But the way I see it is: this is a skill that needs to be improved just like the writing itself. It can only help me in the long run. 

Someday, when I have many more years of publishing under my belt and a bit more money, if the opportunity to hire an editor comes along I will gladly take it. The help would be nice. But as of this point right now, I'm not going to stress myself out on finding the money for one when I'm an unknown author and I have much more time to put in anyway.


----------



## going going gone (Jun 4, 2013)

carinasanfey said:


> +1. Spending $1,500 on a book that won't make anywhere near that amount isn't treating writing like a business, it's treating it like a hobby.


Yes, that seems so to me, too.

I do use a relative (retired, with some spare time on hand) for a final proofing, because a mistake every 5000 words seems to persist no matter what technique I use. I've decided spending three weeks reading a ms. backwards sentence by sentence is a less effective use of my time and patience than handing it over to the relative, who is kind enough to do it for mere thanks.


----------



## zoe tate (Dec 18, 2013)

EC said:


> What all self-editors miss is the insight of a third-party.


And a qualified, professionally trained, experienced and usually _much-needed_ third party, at that.

I have some editing education and experience, but I certainly wouldn't be making a living from my two books, if I'd tried to edit either of them myself.

Most of this thread reminds me of the story about the med-school student who took out his own appendix under local anesthetic, sitting in front of a mirror.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

I want to add something here.    I have either looked at or read most of the posters in this thread.  You all have one thing in common.    You know and understand the English language.    That makes a huge difference. 

So for any dissenters that might come into this thread... if you don't know possessives from contractions hire an editor.    If you don't know the difference between masculine and feminine hire an editor.    If you don't know singular and plural hire an editor.    And watch the homonyms because waist and waste are two different things.    Or better yet, go take an English class or two.  (Not creative writing)
And do buy a style manual.

Ok end of rant.


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

Some writers really do need an editor. I know people who can't spell even with spell-check. They don't use or write good grammar. Their thoughts don't flow in a logical manner. They don't know one homonym from another. They never learned proper punctuation or good sentence structure in school and still don't get it. Those people won't succeed without an editor, no matter how much they reread or listen to text to speech or anything else. Yes, one can learn new things, but it's almost impossible for an adult to go back and learn good English from elementary school on up.

Cinisajoy and I were apparently posting at the same time. She says it well.


----------



## Guest (Dec 11, 2014)

I don't care if people self-edit. I admit that I recommend against it, because after working with thousands of authors over more than a decade the one thing I know is that for most authors read what they _meant_ to write and not what they _actually wrote_. But I don't particularly care how other people run their businesses so long as it doesn't impact me.

What I do care about are people who self-edit and *then whine when they get reviews that say they need an editor.* And they start threads complaining about a negative review or get angsty about people trying to "bring me down!" or assuming that any negativity about their book is jealousy. Because at the end of the day, this is a business. If you are producing a quality product that meets the needs of your customers, good for you. If you are producing sub-par work, then at least take ownership of it and admit the bad production quality is _on you_ and not _mean reviewers_.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Thank you for starting this thread.


----------



## 60169 (May 18, 2012)

I don't have any interest in telling other writers what they need to do. I can only look at my own career and make the best choice I can.

I wouldn't dream of putting a book out without my editor. I can learn the CMS and clean up those kind of mistakes. I can work at rearranging words in a sentence until it's the best I can make it. What I can't do is fix what I can't see. My editor shows me the things I can't see. Their perspective on my work (I use the same editor for everything I write) is so valuable to me that I am happy to write that check every single time.

If I put a work out without running it past him, I'm sure most of my readers would be okay with it, but at least some of them would almost certainly notice that something is not quite the same. When I worked hard to get that new book into the hands of a stranger that's unfamiliar with me, I think they would be somewhat less likely to become a fan. 

When I see that someone has found a system that works for them that is different than mine, I say, "Good for you!" and I mean it. So, "Good for you!"


----------



## Michael McGrinder (Jun 12, 2014)

I recently read a book by a noted indie proponent of paying for editing. A lengthy section about that subject was in desperate need of editing. Do what works for you. Check and double check that it works. That's what editing really is. Great post. Thanks.


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

EC said:


> What all self-editors miss is the insight of a third-party. it's that insight that can transform from mediocre to brilliant.


Uh, you do realize that many (probably most) writers who self-edit also send the book out to beta readers first?


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Ronny K said:


> They know craft, they know the market, they should know what works, what CAN work, what CAN'T work, etc.
> 
> A good editor will also help you with syntax, word choice, and the minutiae--even grammar.


All of which can be learned by a writer willing to learn and practice their craft.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Really? We already acknowledged the whole mis-applied performing surgery on one's self analogies and they still appeared. LOL. Do we know the Kindleboards family or what? LOL.

Look, I'm an author who has not hidden my sales, my titles, or what I do or how I do it. I wish more authors here who feel the need to chide other's publishing paths had the same willingness to back up what they're saying with actual data and stats. And the whole "you might get one-starred" thing is such a cop-out, I'm sorry. I've been brash and bold here for YEARS and my books are doing just fine review wise.

There are very few traditionally published authors that can make a living on just two books. Like probably double digit numbers for a population size. I have 5 books out, all in the top 5% of sales rankings (<#100,000 in the Paid Kindle store, since there are well over 3 million books there), and I'm not making a living. Since July the sales have been between $4,000 a month to $1,500 before I pay expenses.

Are there new authors who are going to run with "I can edit myself and it's going to be a bestseller!" ideas and do just that, not have a strong manuscript, and fall flat on their face? Sure. But they'll learn. Let's stop trying to give warning labels to the lowest common denominator that's probably not going to honestly pursue a writing career and give advice like we're all colleagues with the accolades and credentials to be here. 

Cancelled. Self-edited. Earned over $2500 in it's first 18 months of release as a debut author. Has nearly a 3:1 ratio of 5 stars to 1 stars, and most of those 1 stars are because it's not a traditional romance and I had it miscategorized when it did well during a promotion. Only 3 or 4 reviews mention typos out of 144 reviews. 

It can be done. And to say books wouldn't be selling well unless they were edited isn't fair either, how do you know? Are your reviews and reader feedback all glowing at how wonderful the writing is? Or are they saying they enjoyed the story? 

The Trouble With Horses released actually self-edited. Hit the best seller charts and took off running. I didn't let my copyeditor take a pass over it until it was out for over a month. Then I updated the file. 

Don't confuse the taste of the cake with how carefully it was frosted.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> That's an oversimplification EC. There are writers who can afford an editor and choose to keep the money to themselves, but they won't say so in a public forum and be casted as greedy.
> 
> I pay my editors more for their worth in moral support than trying to take my writing to some brilliant level, honestly. I'm an author that wishes so desperately writing was a team sport. Hence why I waste so much time on forums when I should *ahem* be writing/revising my raw words to make them sparkle. In other realms of writing, everything comes down to the writer to make the piece the best it can be. For whatever reason, fiction writing decided as a sub-group to make new rules.
> 
> Just paying for an editor does not magically make a manuscript any better. It comes down to the talent of the team. Some writers are solo athletes, some perform on a team. It's not about the money but how one wishes to play the game.


It's not an over-simplification - it's a statement of fact. Authors who deny themselves that are paying a much higher price than they will ever know. prior to self-pubbing precisely zero titles got into print without third party input. The only one's that did were vanity pubbed.

It's self-pubbing that's bred this "DIY arrogance."


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

zoe tate said:


> Most of this thread reminds me of the story about the med-school student who took out his own appendix under local anesthetic, sitting in front of a mirror.


Hmm, I think it's a shaky analogy, comparing surgery to writing. How about this:

I recently had to change one of my car's light bulbs and replace the turn signal flasher unit. Somehow I managed to do it on my own with a little research and learning. I didn't have to pay a professional mechanic. The fixes worked; car's working great. Another car owner might have paid to have the repairs done because of any number of reasons.

As with any business decision, I chose where to spend my time and money. I chose to fix the car myself rather than pay a professional. Got the same results. Same with editing. If I choose to self-edit rather than pay a pro, that's my business. Each writer/publisher makes their own choices that are right for their business. Won't be right for someone else's.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Then lord help me, I am vanity published and proud. 

No really, since the dawn of the printing press authors have paid to publish their own works. From political pamphlets to religious sermons to novels. A publisher is just a middleman. Before the printing press you had to go through the Church to be distributed. 

Technological advances always crush the middle men. The producers will always have a paycheck.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Really? We already acknowledged the whole mis-applied performing surgery on one's self analogies and they still appeared. LOL. Do we know the Kindleboards family or what? LOL.


Has anyone created a kboard bingo game yet? Pricing, permafree, KU, and self-editing/surgery all need to be on there. I'd buy two copies. Someone do this.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Then lord help me, I am vanity published and proud.
> 
> No really, since the dawn of the printing press authors have paid to publish their own works. From political pamphlets to religious sermons to novels. A publisher is just a middleman. Before the printing press you had to go through the Church to be distributed.
> 
> Technological advances always crush the middle men. The producers will always have a paycheck.


I've heard it all now.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Jim Johnson said:


> Has anyone created a kboard bingo game yet? Pricing, permafree, KU, and self-editing/surgery all need to be on there. I'd buy two copies. Someone do this.


Don't forget critique my cover x 5, edit my blurb, and has anyone tried this . . . for a thread subject head for the FREE spot. A bingo game or a drinking game, both for the win!

*** I LOVE Kboards. Like with the ferocity that I will slay, with my mighty keyboard/dictating microphone anyone who dares to attack it. This is our writing family. No one said we were a functional one.  ****


----------



## zoe tate (Dec 18, 2013)

EC said:


> It's not an over-simplification - it's a statement of fact. Authors who deny themselves that are paying a much higher price than they will ever know. prior to self-pubbing precisely zero titles got into print without third party input. The only one's that did were vanity pubbed.


This.



EC said:


> It's self-pubbing that's bred this "DIY arrogance."


Of course it is.

It's not just "We're free from quality control": it's "We're free from quality control _and we don't want any, either_".


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

MeganBryce said:


> Yes. I don't know why the holy grail of knowing the market and craft and what works and what doesn't would be reserved for editors and not writers. I think the people who can do all of that are very rare, and I don't think their profession has much to do with it.
> 
> Thanks, Shawn. I say the same right back to you. My point for this thread wasn't to say that anyone was doing their editing wrong. My point was that I'm tired of being shouted at whenever a wisp of _eau de self-editing_ escapes in my posts. And to let other self-editors out there know, you're not alone. And to let newbie writers know that there is no one right path to getting a (good) book out there and read.


To be brutally honest I couldn't care less if you self-edit. When I hand my manuscript over to my editor I know I'm going to get value - and that value is going to be passed to the reader.

If you want to deny your readers that, that's up to you. Editors bring far more to the table than mechanics.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Really, great job Lydniz!!!   Keep on keeping on, sister!

And with that I am OUT. i've been a terrible procrastinator today and still have those 7,000 raw words to go edit. Bad author. 

The irony of this thread's progress though, priceless.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

zoe tate said:


> It's not just "We're free from quality control": it's "We're free from quality control _and we don't want any, either_".


Pretty confident no one in this thread is supporting that statement. Simply noting that there are options as to WHERE that QC comes from. Hired help, DIY, whatever. Editing needs to happen on a title. Who does the editing is irrelevant. No casual reader I know reads a book and thinks "Wow, what a great read. Eddy (Edi) McEditor sure did a fine job red-lining that one!"

And I've yet to hear of a reader returning a book upon finding out that the writer self-edited. I'm sure it's possible, though. The world's a crazy place.


----------



## danicapage (Dec 11, 2014)

I'm going to offer my two cents here.

I agree that a self-editing is often sufficient. I am a writer and an editor by trade. I work as a journalist for several newspapers and have worked as an editor at a publishing house and as a technical editor. I know both sides.

I'm super confident in my ability to edit. I have a degree in it. Yet, every time I try to self-edit my own work, I find massive errors or just holes--jumps I thought the readers would make that they don't. Some people are quite good at self-editing, but I usually don't advise it.

As an editor, I can say the contribution we make is invaluable. And as far as having to pay $1500 a novel, my rate is more around $300 per novel and I know many other editors who offer the same rate. 

Just make sure you are informed about your decision whatever way you decide.

If you want to self-edit, there will inevitably be some errors, but it might not matter like many of you have said. For me, 95% of the self-published books I've read could have used an editor. Just do your homework before you close your mind. (I'm sure many of you who have self-edited have done your homework and I respect your decision.)

I hope I didn't offend anybody. I wish all of you the best of luck whether you self-edit or not.


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

Eleven books, not spending more than $200 total for everything, doing it all myself, I'm proud to say this is my job. Content, typos, all the tricks I've learned over the years, not one complaint. I can be a little heady, and that's okay by me. And *Self-editing for Fiction Writers *is, hands down, the best book I ever read!


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Thanks, everyone. I am drinking prosecco as we speak - mainly to celebrate the fact that I've got the damn thing off my back finally and can now stop neglecting my children and get on with organising Christmas.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

RipleyKing said:


> Eleven books, not spending more than $200 total for everything, doing it all myself, I'm proud to say this is my job. Content, typos, all the tricks I've learned over the years, not one complaint. I can be a little heady, and that's okay by me. And *Self-editing for Fiction Writers *is, hands down, the best book I ever read!


Mind if I check your freebies? 
This leads to the question: how are they selling?


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

Good luck with that!


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

RipleyKing said:


> Eleven books, not spending more than $200 total for everything, doing it all myself, I'm proud to say this is my job. Content, typos, all the tricks I've learned over the years, not one complaint. I can be a little heady, and that's okay by me. And *Self-editing for Fiction Writers *is, hands down, the best book I ever read!


I know your genre, you will get fewer complaints.


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

Go read my freebies, and check out the reviews page on my blog! Have fun! Let me know what you think!


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

RipleyKing said:


> Go read my freebies, and check out the reviews page on my blog! Have fun! Let me know what you think!


I should charge you a dollar per typo. Just teasing. I know I picked up your freebies last week.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

I self-edit. I enjoy it, and I think I do a reasonably good job. That said, the issue is complex, and there's no one right answer that can be applied to all writers. These are the things that come to mind for me:

First, no, it is NOT easy to master writing mechanics as an adult. There's some research on this in composition and rhetoric, the academic discipline that studies how people learn to write. Researchers aren't sure why it's so difficult to master mechanics, but it very clearly is. So can some people use the Chicago manual to produce error-free writing? Yes, absolutely. Does that mean everyone can do it? Nope. If you're in the latter group, are you a "bad" writer? Nope. You can be a great storyteller and suck at mechanics.

Second, is editing just a matter of producing error-free writing? No, a good editor will do more than fix out-and-out errors. He or she will generally tighten, polish, and beautify your prose in a genre-appropriate way. This is harder than correcting errors because it's subtle work. Even people who self-edit with some success might benefit from this other aspect of professional editing.

Third, does a book need to be well edited to sell well? Maybe not. It some genres, it probably does. In others, editing seems less important. We've all seen poorly edited books that are selling like hotcakes. Will a poorly edited book drive away some readers? Absolutely. I'm one of those readers ... I just can't stand it. But it's clear that not all readers feel this way -- if they did, the aforementioned books wouldn't sell. It's possible that many readers don't notice a large percentage of the errors present because they're wrapped up in the story or because their own mechanics are poor. So, how perfect do you think your editing need to be? Are you a pragmatist or a perfectionist when it comes to your books' presentation?

Fourth, where is the writer in her/his career? How likely is the book to earn back what's invested in it? Getting a book really well edited is quite expensive, especially if it's long. If the writer is just starting out, how can he or she be sure that the story is strong enough to make investing a large sum of money in editing worthwhile? To be blunt, there's no point putting lipstick on a pig. But how do you really know your story is strong until you get it out to readers, who are the only judges that matter? Unless you're well off enough to have money to spare, this is a real conundrum, and it goes for cover art, as well.

An awful lot of writers have started out DIYing or relying on volunteers and service-trading for editing/covering their first book and have then invested more in professional editing/covers as they became confident that their writing had commercial potential. This seems to have worked out well for many people, and I love that it's an option -- with indie, you can be poor and still stand a chance. But in hyper-competitive genres, maybe this won't work. Dunno. It's a tough decision to make. I will say that it makes me cringe to see people invest upwards of $1,000 in a first book when they have no idea if it will actually sell. For some people, it works out like gangbusters. Those are the folks who stick around to tell us about it. But if you lost your car or your health insurance because you put a bunch of money into a book that didn't sell, or even if the impact wasn't so dire, you probably don't report back on the mistake. At the very least, it's embarrassing. Therefore, it's easy to end up with a prevailing happy-ending narrative -- _Invest in your book; it'll pay off!_ -- that's neither accurate nor predictive.

Lastly, how do you know you've found a good editor? If your mechanics are weak enough that you really need one, you won't be able to judge the quality of the advice you've been given. I've seen an awful lot of "professionally edited" books that have consistent error patterns, probably because the editor didn't know that particular thing was wrong. Dangling modifiers are a good example.

So, I guess my take on it is that hiring an editor is a complex, potentially difficult decision. A lot of quite individual factors need to be considered. Don't listen to someone who says, _Everyone must hire an editor_ or _Everyone should be able to self-edit_ or whatever. There is no one-size-fits-all answer. Instead, think through the issue for yourself, given your individual situation, with as much clear-eyed realism as you can muster.


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

Don't scare me like that, Cinisajoy!


----------



## ashleyrose (Aug 4, 2012)

I self-edit, I have 13 published books so far, I've been at this for 3 years and the last two years have yielded me consecutive six figure incomes.  I can afford an editor, but I choose not to use one.  Self-editing has not hurt me.  The OP is correct.  Editing is something that can be learned...and you get better with practice.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

RipleyKing said:


> Don't scare me like that!


I must give you credit for figuring out how to get moved up on my TBR.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Becca Mills said:


> I self-edit. I enjoy it, and I think I do a reasonably good job. That said, the issue is complex, and there's no one right answer that can be applied to all writers. These are the things that come to mind for me:
> 
> First, no, it is NOT easy to master writing mechanics as an adult. There's some research on this in composition and rhetoric, the academic discipline that studies how people learn to write. Researchers aren't sure why it's so difficult to master mechanics, but it very clearly is. So can some people use the Chicago manual to produce error-free writing? Yes, absolutely. Does that mean everyone can do it? Nope. If you're in the latter group, are you a "bad" writer? Nope. You can be a great storyteller and suck at mechanics.
> 
> ...


A very sensible and well-balanced post.


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

Reading a book backwards: Last paragraph first, and then up from there. Not page by page.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

RipleyKing said:


> Reading a book backwards: Last paragraph first. Not page by page.


That sounds hard to do. PS started your book and sent you a message.


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

The brain supplies continuity, that everything works problem leading to the odd typo and whatever, and reading backward paragraph to paragraph breaks that continuity. It's not easy, but it does solve more problems than it creates. Mostly with content. A cool trick that works.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

I'm another self-editor, and one of my proofreading passes is always reading a printed copy backwards paragraph by paragraph. At this point, I'd be happy to pay someone else to do it. The problem is the few editors I'm sure would do a good job are busy and have to be scheduled. I don't write to schedule and don't want to wait once the book is ready. Also except for a very few, I have trust issues. There have been too many posts here and elsewhere along the lines of: "I paid $xxx for editing and am still getting reviews that say my book needs editing." There have also been a few posts along the lines of: "My editor says this is correct. Is it?" After that comes some ridiculously wrong example of punctuation or grammar.

As to my own, no, they're not perfect. If I go over one again a year after publishing I pick up another few typos. However, this is from our own Red Adept, who reviewed my mystery back in February 2010 not long after it came out and before she turned from reviewing to editing herself:

"Editing/Formatting: 5 Stars 
Both were of professional quality."

I do my own formatting too.

However, I don't believe anyone can do it. Some of us are obsessive nitpickers and enjoyed things like diagramming sentences back in the day. Someone who is a good storyteller but who never learned or cared about details of punctuation and grammar is probably better off paying an editor than beating her head against the self-editing rock.


----------



## Guest (Dec 11, 2014)

ellenoc said:


> Some of us are obsessive nitpickers and enjoyed things like *diagramming sentences* back in the day.


I always knew there was something not quite right about you. Now I know...lol


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I always knew there was something not quite right about you. Now I know...lol


It's worse than that - I took 4 years of Latin in high school and enjoyed it. There are other secrets too shameful to confess.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

LOL I also took 4 years of Latin in high school! That's funny! And a year of ancient greek.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

I did three years of Latin and three years of French, and then in my senior year our language teacher went to a different school. I was bummed to miss the fourth years of each. Quel dommage.


----------



## Cactus Lady (Jun 4, 2014)

Yay, thank you for this post!

I also self-edit, and enjoy it. I was always good at spelling/grammar/punctuation/word usage and other mechanics (I went to school in the days of copying out long lists of spelling words twenty times over and endless worksheets of spelling and grammar exercises), and I've put a lot of work into learning writing craft, revising, and editing. I do use beta readers, and I took Holly Lisle's How To Revise Your Novel course (the best $250 you can spend on your writing; even if you hire an editor, this method will get your manuscripts in a lot better shape, saving time and money). It takes time and work and practice and a willingness to be persnickety with details and really really honest with yourself. But it can be done.

I've been complimented on how well-edited my books are, and even asked to edit other people's work (tried it once, bleh. Hated it, though I do edit my husband's professional newsletter he sends out to clients, and do quick proofreads of fanfics I post on a fanworks site I run). On the other hand, I see way too many indie books with a professional editor credited that are filled with mistakes I would never let get by me in my own work, from structural problems to misuse of "affect" and "effect".

Finally, and this is less important but still a factor, I'm not as prolific as a lot of writers here, but with the number of books I've released already and have in progress, I'm not interested in going hundreds or even a thousand dollars or more in the hole for each one for editing. I do pay for custom cover art because that's something I know I can't do myself, but editing and formatting I'm capable of doing myself and it's a better business decision for me to not sink money into those.

ETA: I strongly believe that even writers who do hire editors need to know all that stuff for themselves, good story structure, word usage, mechanics, and so on, so they can tell if their editor is actually doing a good job. Knowing those things and being able to produce a competently-written piece of prose is a writer's job. Hire an editor if you want that second set of eyes or as a timesaver, but DON'T rely on them to do your job for you.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

For me, it's not about could. Hiring a competent proofreader saves me oodles of time. My stuff is really clean (as a journalist these days, you have to write clean to make it with the lack of editors), but hiring a proofreader just saves me days (sometimes weeks) on releases -- and I'm constantly working on releases. So, it's worth the $100-$150 for a proofreader on my pen name stuff. Now, for my main name stuff, I got lucky. I have a former editor who is also a professor who does a lot more than proofread. He cleans things up. He asks questions. He makes my stuff "sing" -- for lack of a better word. He doesn't want money, but we're in a negotiation for me to pay him. He could easily be making $1,500 a book. I wish I had him for my earlier stuff. I'm trying to get him to take $500 a book -- but he keeps balking. I would make that $500 a release back on the first day of sales, so it's worth it for me. I never worry about the stuff he's been through. He helps me just write in a more concise manner. Now, once I'm done with my job after the first of the year, I plan on resurrecting a dead erotica pen name and launching a another one and I'll do all of that myself. Those are shorter works and making a pass at them doesn't take nearly as long as it does on a novel. I just like having another set of eyes on my stuff. For the pen name stuff, I go through two passes and then I send it to the proofreader. When I get it back, I do one final pass -- and I do find a handful of things that my proofer missed.
So, basically for me, it's about money vs. time. My time is valuable to me, so I hire a proofreader. That's really all it comes down to.


----------



## Cactus Lady (Jun 4, 2014)

> So, basically for me, it's about money vs. time. My time is valuable to me, so I hire a proofreader. That's really all it comes down to.


That is something that has to be balanced out. For me, a stay-at-home mom with no kids left at home and too disabled from chronic fatigue syndrome to even think about working outside the home, and no separate source of income (my husband works too hard for me to feel comfortable asking to put thousands and thousands of dollars of the family funds into books that might never come close to earning it back), I have way more time than money. Even if I did have the money, though, I'm not sure hiring an editor would be a good ROI for me.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Developmental editing is an invention of the mid-20th century at a time when publishers flexed their muscles to put the authors in their place. It is in many senses the very antithesis of self publishing, especially when it is promoted as having your text sculpted to make it fit the market. When Virginia Woolf complained about the tyranny of the editors she was not complaining about developmental editors as they had not been invented yet (she was complaining about commissioning editors). Developmental editing is little known outside the English-speaking world. Where developmental editing is used in mainstream publishers it is often in a remedial fashion, e.g., copy editor tells author that they have to be transferred to developmental editing because the structure is not up to standard for that publisher.

I self-edit and I aim for literary awards with book circles as my target audience. Most developmental editors would not touch me with a barge pole as most advertise themselves as genre-only, because they need genre rules to have something to impose. I write in order to break what rules I find hiding in fear under the carpet. I self-publish in order to avoid the tyranny of the developmental editors and I am not afraid of Virginia Woolf. Who would want to developmentally edit James Joyce? Editing me would not be that bad, but I wouldn't want to risk a developmental editor's grip on their sanity.

I was trained to self-edit writing a humanities PhD that ended up as 85,000 words, but counting all drafts and rewrites over two million words were written over a seven year period and self-edited with beta reading and critique by my supervisors. As Cinasjoy says, I know English and I know it a lot better than most editors.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Kyra Halland said:


> That is something that has to be balanced out. For me, a stay-at-home mom with no kids left at home and too disabled from chronic fatigue syndrome to even think about working outside the home, and no separate source of income (my husband works too hard for me to feel comfortable asking to put thousands and thousands of dollars of the family funds into books that might never come close to earning it back), I have way more time than money. Even if I did have the money, though, I'm not sure hiring an editor would be a good ROI for me.


Since I can write an entire romantic suspense book in a week, and that's about how long a proofreader has a book, it's a good exchange for me. I can see why it wouldn't be for everyone, but it definitely is for me.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

YodaRead said:


> Since I can write an entire romantic suspense book in a week, and that's about how long a proofreader has a book, it's a good exchange for me. I can see why it wouldn't be for everyone, but it definitely is for me.


Another reason I don't go to an editor is the juggling it requires. I'd have to be far more disciplined with my schedule than I am at present, and it would add an extra layer of admin which I just can't fit in currently.


----------



## Ronny K (Aug 2, 2011)

Can someone differentiate between Self-editing and Writing for me?


----------



## Cege Smith (Dec 11, 2011)

Ronny K said:


> Can someone differentiate between Self-editing and Writing for me?


My definition would be typing new words (writing) vs. reviewing already written words (editing).


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Ronny K said:


> Can someone differentiate between Self-editing and Writing for me?


Writing comes out of the creative voice; editing (self-editing, whatever) comes out of the critical voice.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Lydniz said:


> Another reason I don't go to an editor is the juggling it requires. I'd have to be far more disciplined with my schedule than I am at present, and it would add an extra layer of admin which I just can't fit in currently.


On a related note, this sad story: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,203561.0.html

It'd be awful to have a pre-order deadline or schedule wrecked by a freelance editor not able to meet their deadline.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Ronny K said:


> Can someone differentiate between Self-editing and Writing for me?


Editing is any process whereby you think that could be better. Writing is making it better. Usually you introduce further errors at that point so editing always needs to have the final say. Those differentiations work whether self-editing or working with mainstream publishing. The worst edited mainstream published books usually turn out to be one where the publisher, editor, or writer delayed the process and the final edit was not done in order to hit a publishing deadline. A case in point is the Kindle version of Snow Falling on Cedars where they gave up editing the poor scan of the print book about half-way through.


----------



## Jill Nojack (Mar 7, 2014)

Ronny K said:


> Can someone differentiate between Self-editing and Writing for me?


I know that when I'm editing, I've got an entirely different attitude--I'm looking for darlings to kill. I'm ruthless. I'm also looking for the errors and the things that will annoy a reader and/or were left out of the foolish writer's narrative. I'm not in "let's get this story out there" mode any more.

But, in many ways, a structural editor is, in fact, contributing as a writer with a very specific role. But we call them editors rather than co-writers. Maybe because we pay them?

The way I see it, only proofreaders aren't "writing" per se.

I think it's all really an issue of semantics.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Girl, you like to live dangerously! There are things one simply must not speak of on these forums. Self-editing, making your own covers and not spending money on promotions are three sins which must not be ignored.

I learned to write clean copy as a reporter and later as the editor and head writer for a company newsletter. No one had time to correct my mistakes, so I was expected not to make them.

Not everyone can learn this skill, but it can be learned. It's not something a new writer who doesn't have a decent grasp of the English language can probably do, but for those of us who are willing and able, then it's an option.

Like anything else in this publishing business, if your way works for you, then great. But don't denigrate those who follow a different path. The elitists on this board are bound to strike, harping on people to just save their pennies and soon they too can save up the _minimum_ they consider it takes to self-publish, which is usually $1500 per book. Because we all know we must have a world-class cover as well, we should add another thousand dollars to that amount.


----------



## Christa Wick (Nov 1, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I always knew there was something not quite right about you. Now I know...lol


Since we're on the topic, back in undergrad, I took a fabulous Advanced Grammar class. Great teacher and a great textbook (a very short textbook, which was part of why it was great IMO). Alas, that teacher is now dead and the class is no longer offered at the college. I can't remember the name of the textbook and everything I've bought or looked at are too basic or so boring I'm never getting deeper into them than I already have.

So, anyone have book suggestions for advanced grammar?


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Lydniz said:


> Another reason I don't go to an editor is the juggling it requires. I'd have to be far more disciplined with my schedule than I am at present, and it would add an extra layer of admin which I just can't fit in currently.


This! I think that I have the same issue as Lydniz. Fitting in an editor would force me to be more disciplined, which isn't my strong suit.


----------



## Ronny K (Aug 2, 2011)

cegesmith said:


> My definition would be typing new words (writing) vs. reviewing already written words (editing).





Jim Johnson said:


> Writing comes out of the creative voice; editing (self-editing, whatever) comes out of the critical voice.





Mercia McMahon said:


> Editing is any process whereby you think that could be better. Writing is making it better. Usually you introduce further errors at that point so editing always needs to have the final say. Those differentiations work whether self-editing or working with mainstream publishing. The worst edited mainstream published books usually turn out to be one where the publisher, editor, or writer delayed the process and the final edit was not done in order to hit a publishing deadline. A case in point is the Kindle version of Snow Falling on Cedars where they gave up editing the poor scan of the print book about half-way through.





Jill Nojack said:


> I know that when I'm editing, I've got an entirely different attitude--I'm looking for darlings to kill. I'm ruthless. I'm also looking for the errors and the things that will annoy a reader and/or were left out of the foolish writer's narrative. I'm not in "let's get this story out there" mode any more.
> 
> But, in many ways, a structural editor is, in fact, contributing as a writer with a very specific role. But we call them editors rather than co-writers. Maybe because we pay them?
> 
> ...


I like these answers.

I think the term "self-editing" has always confounded me because as I write I can't help but go over every sentence as it comes out. This of course makes me a slow, obsessive writer, but that's who I am at the moment, and I bet I'm not alone. Interesting.


----------



## Iain Ryan (Jun 25, 2014)

Totally 100% onboard with listening to your manuscripts back via  text-to-speech. I write lean, so pace and rhythm is super important. But FOR REAL if you can spend 6 hours with the computer robot narrating your work and it still sounds interesting, fluid, relatable, etc...you're a long way through the editing process. I can't overstate how much this has improved my work. Over time, it's made me a better writer.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

I am actually pretty DIY. I do my own covers, book-trailers and "self-edit" developmentally with beta-readers before sending off to copy-editor. (This is my process for books 2 +3, 1 had a lot more initial investment.) That said I work as a professional cover designer so my DIY covers well... aren't. As for editing, I'll say this, working with my fancy editor for book one produced a MUCH better product in my opinion. Unfortunately, it just didn't give me ROI. Readers liked Book 2 more. Great prose just isn't that interesting to folks anymore, it's all about story. And finding an editor who focuses not on what they think a good story is, but what a good story for the GENRE is, is nigh impossible. 

That's why I have author friends.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

she-la-ti-da said:


> The elitists on this board are bound to strike, harping on people to just save their pennies and soon they too can save up the _minimum_ they consider it takes to self-publish, which is usually $1500 per book.


I don't know about anyone else who does her own, but one of the problems I have with the idea of hiring some of the editing/proofing done is the price. If someone offered me $1,500 just to proofread someone else's 100,000-word novel as thoroughly as I do my own, I'd turn them down. So when I see low quotes for proofreading, either someone is a masochist, or they're going through the manuscript once. At a minimum I read it on my Kindle, print it and read it out loud, and then read it backwards as discussed above.

I'm less sure about copy editing. That would probably depend on what the manuscript was like to start with. Maybe I'm wrong, but developmental editing, which usually has the highest quotes, seems to me to be the easiest of the lot. Isn't that what beta readers and reviewers do? _This doesn't work. That was too slow. Couldn't understand that. _The difference would seem to be the editor suggests fixes - although I've had beta readers who wanted to rewrite things.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Ellen, I think you dropped a zero.


----------



## Jill Nojack (Mar 7, 2014)

Ronny K said:


> I like these answers.
> 
> I think the term "self-editing" has always confounded me because as I write I can't help but go over every sentence as it comes out. This of course makes me a slow, obsessive writer, but that's who I am at the moment, and I bet I'm not alone. Interesting.


I was a slow, obsessive writer once upon a time. My first book (that I published, not that I wrote) of around 50k took 18 months to write. I wrote the second 54k book during Nanowrimo the same year. It is by far the better book. I recommend doing it just once to force the story out and see if your obsessing really makes things better.

As it turns out, obsessing for years taught me many things I now do naturally. After writing the book in a month, then completing two months of "editing" and 5-7 rounds of proofreading--not _obsessive_ proofreading, I swear--I usually have something that I am happy with. The longer the book takes to write, the less well-written it is. I think it's because I get side-tracked from the bones of the story by paying too much attention to the prose.

I tend to believe that many writers can self-edit and hope that I am among them. I also believe that you can't really self-proofread. I know I get close. Very close. I used to do it for pay, but you always miss things in your own books. However, paying someone to proofread isn't an option yet. He or she is unlikely to accept a penny an hour in recompense like I will


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

cinisajoy said:


> Ellen, I think you dropped a zero.


Maybe so, or maybe I should have been honest and said, "You couldn't pay me enough to...."


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

> Most of this thread reminds me of the story about the med-school student who took out his own appendix under local anesthetic, sitting in front of a mirror.


Sorry, that's just nonsense. Reductio ad absurdum arguments are just fixed opinions trying to belittle other, differing opinions.



> It's not an over-simplification - it's a statement of fact. Authors who deny themselves that are paying a much higher price than they will ever know.


That's absurd for a different reason. It's not a statement of fact. It's a statement of your opinion. If it was a fact, you could direct us to the source you gleaned the fact from. (The inside of your head doesn't count.)

Both of these posters have (unwittingly I suspect) made the OP's point: There is an 'arrogance' about some writers and their opinions on editing that is just absurd and nonsensical in the lengths that they take it.

Sorry if I'm being a little feisty about this, but I get sick of all the "thou shalt nots" that get tossed around. Offer me a *cogent* argument as to why an external editor is critical and I'll listen.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Michael McClung said:


> Sorry, that's just nonsense. Reductio ad absurdum arguments are just fixed opinions trying to belittle other, differing opinions.
> 
> That's absurd for a different reason. It's not a statement of fact. It's a statement of your opinion. If it was a fact, you could direct us to the source you gleaned the fact from. (The inside of your head doesn't count.)
> 
> ...


You forgot to quote the post where I said I couldn't care less if the OP self-edited or not.

You appear to be fixing for a (feisty) fight. Good for you - there's plenty of posts on this thread alone which point out the dangers of self-editing, but you seem to be blind to them. That's before we even begin to look outside of this thread into the wider world.

I have a pal that shares this arrogant delusion - he has just spent a year writing and editing an 86,000 word novel. Pubbed, he has garnered a mere three reviews so far - all of which refer to the editing. Man, that guy argued black and blue with me that he could do it - and I knew he couldn't.

So what did I do? I offered to pay for the editing, and he still knocked it back as he "was perfectly capable of doing it himself." His novel sunk without trace - shame that.

So you want proof definitive? Take one of your currently pubbed self-edited titles and send it to an editor - and have a good look at what you get back. No need to get involved in circular arguments on the internet - just do it, and find out for yourself.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Oh, and the elephant in the room - while you are fretting over the editing, the rest of us are half-way through the next novel.


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

EC said:


> Oh, and the elephant in the room - while you are fretting over the editing, the rest of us are half-way through the next novel.


I've found self editing has increased my output by about 500%.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

EC, my first novel was edited by Kathleen O'Shea at Random House. It's not me that has to prove anything. You make pronouncements, just throw in some facts to back them up. Facts, not anecdotes.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Michael McClung said:


> EC, my first novel was edited by Kathleen O'Shea at Random House. It's not me that has to prove anything. You make pronouncements, just throw in some facts to back them up. Facts, not anecdotes.


The evidence will come when you send one of your self-pub titles to an editor.

Maybe you'll get a gold star

Or maybe you'll get a shock.

If I were you I would spend the few hundred bucks required to find out.

Then that way there would be no need for anecdotes or circular internet arguments.

Do it or don't do it - up to you.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Half Pint said:


> I've found self editing has increased my output by about 500%.


That gave me a good giggle, thanks for that.


----------



## a_g (Aug 9, 2013)

So, what is the suggestion for those who simply do not have the money to drop on an editor?

Is it to simply not self-publish until they do?

Is it to utilize betas? And what if those betas don't have the 'experience' a 'professional editor' has?

So has it come to this, that unless a self-publisher actually has the money in their hand to 'do it right', they shouldn't try at all?


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

> So has it come to this, that unless a self-publisher actually has the money in their hand to 'do it right', they shouldn't try at all?


According to EC, the answer is apparently 'yes.' Which is why I called it absurd.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

a_g said:


> So, what is the suggestion for those who simply do not have the money to drop on an editor?
> 
> Is it to simply not self-publish until they do?
> 
> ...


No, not at all. The argument here is between people who choose to self-edit even though they have the funds to hire an editor, and those of us that think that's absurd.

If you don't have the funds, then you need to use every free tool at your disposal to ensure you can put out the best product possible. In the case of the author I mentioned above, he sent out books to beta readers, hardly any of whom were avid readers, and none experienced in beta reading. Once he got their comments back, he went ahead and pubbed, including via createspace. So what happened? Along with the usual grammatical and spelling mistakes you would expect - the author had subbed his name for the characters name at several points in the story. Shameful.

Even more shameful on a paperback.

Most shaming of all? I had offered to pay for editing and was rejected.

Naturally, the author blamed the beta-readers for not catching it.

If you can't afford editing, subject your title to as much stress-testing as possible, then pub.


----------



## JR. (Dec 10, 2014)

Why can't you see that different people are different, and some are good at certain things that others aren't?


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Michael McClung said:


> According to EC, the answer is apparently 'yes.' Which is why I called it absurd.


That gave me another good giggle - you have the opportunity to disprove me - and you are in control. Send off one of your manuscripts to be edited and see what happens. I was going to offer to pay for it myself, but I've decided I'd rather pay for a newbie that can't afford it.

That's something I'll address in January.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> This! I think that I have the same issue as Lydniz. Fitting in an editor would force me to be more disciplined, which isn't my strong suit.


My proofreader can fit a book in within a few days and she turns it around in the same amount of time. She takes less than a week. She doesn't require appointments, and that's what I like.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I think a lot of points for and against self-editing have been made--and people can and will take from this thread what they think will work (or won't work) for them.  

Let's keep it civil, and if you've made your points move on. And, please, avoid calling people idiots, OK?  Thanks!

EC, I do want to point out that there's a vast difference between the process you describe your friend using and what has been described by several of our members who have posted in the thread.

Betsy


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

I have sick grammar skills because I'm an SAT tutor. It's so annoying. I see grammar errors everywhere.

But I'm a terrible typist, and I always miss typos. Weird stuff.

I would never put something out unless I had someone else proofread it. I can't proofread to save my life.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

EC, I don't need gold stars or anyone to pay for anything. I get solid reviews, and that's quite enough. It would be nice if you could admit that not every writer in the world needs an editor -- if nothing else it's statistically impossible -- but hey, you know best, because... because why again? Oh, yes, that one guy didn't listen to your advice and put out a crap book.

Got it.

Edited to add: Moving on now, Betsy.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 20, 2014)

Thread reminded me of this recent article:

http://thoughtcatalog.com/porter-anderson/2014/12/self-publishing-and-the-quality-question-its-called-rigor/

I generally recommend authors work with editors when they ask me however I've learned a lot from people here who are finding success self-editing.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Crystal_ said:


> I have sick grammar skills because I'm an SAT tutor. It's so annoying. I see grammar errors everywhere.
> 
> But I'm a terrible typist, and I always miss typos. Weird stuff.
> 
> I would never put something out unless I had someone else proofread it. I can't proofread to save my life.


It's incredibly hard to proofread one's own work. It might be harder for fiction than for other kinds of writing -- it's so easy to drop into the story and lose focus. I learned that the hard way when I published my first book. I'm reasonably confident in my proofreading now, but at first, I totally sucked.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

EC, you've made your points.  Agree to disagree.  

Betsy


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

Maybe it's funny that self-editing has allowed me to increase my output, but the fact is that I now make a livable income from my work. Numbers don't lie. Sorry.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

MeganBryce said:


> Ha! Yeah, I wrote it last night and then slept on it to be absolutely sure I wanted to post. I've been pleasantly surprised by the discussion and have gotten a few tips, too.
> 
> For some reason, I can't quote an earlier post but Mercia said, "I self-edit and get flamed here and on Goodreads for saying so."
> 
> I've just started dipping my toe in the Goodreads water and being very cautious about it. I think I'll save the self-edit talk for kboards for now.


Goodreads can be quite -- strident -- about things. Best to not rile them up, though I'm sure you're going to catch the monkey crap for even posting about it here, on a public forum. I know on another site, this topic has already appeared on its radar.

I have Self Editing for Fiction Writers and it covers more than grammar and punctuation. The focus is more on story construction. The James Scott Bell book (he has some other good writing books as well) is also good.



Michael McClung said:


> EC, my first novel was edited by Kathleen O'Shea at Random House. It's not me that has to prove anything. *You make pronouncements, just throw in some facts to back them up. Facts, not anecdotes.*


Michael, you might as well give up on the those two (I'm pretty sure I know who the other one is). You will never get anything but firm pronouncements about the only correct way to put out work, with dire warnings against any other method. They're right, you're wrong. End of story._snort_


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

I self-edit as well, because I'm good at it. Honestly I'd be shocked if any reader could find a single typo in my book (not saying it isn't possible, but I really would be shocked).


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Ted Cross said:


> I self-edit as well, because I'm good at it. Honestly I'd be shocked if any reader could find a single typo in my book (not saying it isn't possible, but I really would be shocked).


Heh. I once offered money on these boards to anyone who could spot a typo in the story in my sig. I haven't heard anything back yet. To be fair, though, it is only 2,000 words.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

I do and have done both. I will probably continue to do both. Self-editing is great and saves me money. But when I use an editor, I'm paying for one-on-one attention, support, advice and opinions on word choices, plot strands and all manner of things. He'll tell me where a scene falls flat and what I could think about doing to improve it. He'll make suggestions that I disagree with and he'll argue with me. And eventually I usually grudgingly admit he's right. My books are better for his input and he's worth every penny.


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

DebBennett said:


> I do and have done both. I will probably continue to do both. Self-editing is great and saves me money. But when I use an editor, I'm paying for one-on-one attention, support, advice and opinions on word choices, plot strands and all manner of things. He'll tell me where a scene falls flat and what I could think about doing to improve it. He'll make suggestions that I disagree with and he'll argue with me. And eventually I usually grudgingly admit he's right. My books are better for his input and he's worth every penny.


I'll always believe that a really good professional editor can make my books even better than they are. But the editors I have seen work with indie authors have not impressed me so far. I'm sure there must be some good ones out there that I just haven't yet encountered. I'd love a chance to work with a really great editor, but until I can find one, I'll trust my own abilities. It was the same with the cover. I trusted my own tastes for cover design more than what I've seen out there. I didn't want a publisher deciding for me when I so rarely see a cover that wows me even from the big 5.


----------



## Jake Parent (Dec 5, 2014)

I mostly self-edited my book and yet, that didn't keep me from sending it out in earlyish form to about 10 really smart people I know to get feedback on it (for free). 

I will note, however, that I do think it makes sense to get a few people to read through a nearly finished manuscript to catch typos. Having written one page press releases for years, it always amazed me how I could go over such a short document thirty times and still miss an extra (or missing) word.


----------



## Christa Wick (Nov 1, 2012)

a_g said:


> So, what is the suggestion for those who simply do not have the money to drop on an editor?


Barter with another author who can. Maybe you can do covers or website development for them if you have that skill.

Second option, maybe you don't have enough for a novel to be edited, but could pay for the first third - see if you can serialize it and let the first pay for the second's edit and the second for the third.


----------



## Z. Rider (Aug 15, 2014)

I self-edited my earlier stuff (and used one or two beta readers for most of it as well). I still do a lot of self-editing (and work with two beta readers on each book), but when that's done, I send it to an editor, and after the editor, I get it proofread. I prefer this setup because 1) proofreading took a _lot_ of time, and it's tedious, and I'd still miss things (but I don't miss proofreading!!), and 2) I'm pretty good on prose-level self-editing (though the editor still finds some things that can be smoothed out), but I'm blind to story/character problems past a certain point. Even after the beta readers catch some of those, I still feel like it needs one more pass through someone completely impartial, both to make sure I'm not missing anything else and to make sure that the changes I made based on the beta readers' suggestions were enough.

Maybe one day I'll feel confident enough about my story skills to go back to self-editing, or maybe I'll always feel like I need that extra pass through an editor to sleep at night--who knows. But I agree with the sentiment many have expressed in this thread: you need to do what feels right to you, because it's _you_ you have to live with. If not paying for an editor and/or proofreader is going to make you toss and turn at night, get one (or both). If paying for an editor you feel like you don't need/won't return its investment is going to make you toss and turn at night, self edit. (Either way, I totally recommend the self editing books mentioned in this thread. I prefer James Scott Bell's, but I found both useful.)


----------



## Abalone (Jan 31, 2014)

A CMoS book costs around $40 and is so worth it.



Mercia McMahon said:


> I self-edit and get flamed here and on Goodreads for saying so.* I also once worked with a funeral director who did his own embalming and was not trained.* A former member here liked to shout a lot about treating your writing like a business and neither he nor the posse like to hear the obvious riposte - I am and that is why I refuse to give £1000 to a wannabe who knows 10% of what I know about writing for the sake of a book that would be lucky to make £500.
> 
> I wonder if the posse hunted down a younger Hugh Howey in his self-editing days.


I had to read this about 6x before I understood what it was you were trying to say...


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here (Apr 8, 2013)




----------



## Molly Tomorrow (Jul 22, 2014)

EC said:


> I have a pal that shares this arrogant delusion - he has just spent a year writing and editing an 86,000 word novel. Pubbed, he has garnered a mere three reviews so far - all of which refer to the editing. Man, that guy argued black and blue with me that he could do it - and I knew he couldn't.
> 
> So what did I do? I offered to pay for the editing, and he still knocked it back as he "was perfectly capable of doing it himself." His novel sunk without trace - shame that.


This anecdote doesn't remotely support the point you're trying to make and certainly doesn't support the implication that people who self-edit are arrogant and delusional.

It supports the point that your friend was bad at self-editing, stubborn about it and paid the price. Which is tangential to the argument you are trying to make. I don't think anyone here would argue that it's a bad idea to self-edit if you're not very good at it. It's kind of self-evident.

If any of the people you are arguing with have universally good reviews that don't mention the editing, your anecdote actually supports an alternative point of view. That self-editing is not an issue if the self in question is good at it.

The fact that other people who self-edit have their own anecdotes that differ from the fate of your pal suggests that it _is_ a skill, and some people are better at it than others.

I've got no real horse in this race. But your logic here is absolutely terrible.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

This made me laugh  I've done it before, back in the days before spell-check was really a thing. God, I'm getting old.


----------



## ricola (Mar 3, 2014)

Copy editing and proofreading are crucial to a quality product.  There aren't 1 in 100 writers who can learn to see their own typos and the mistakes they edit in.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Fantastic post. I completely agree. It's a lot of work to learn how to edit at a professional level, and for many the solution will be to hire out that work. It's the difference between calling a contractor or doing the home repair yourself. Neither way is wrong, but to say one way is the ONLY way is certainly wrong.

Bravo.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

> Copy editing and proofreading are crucial to a quality product.


I absolutely agree.



> There aren't 1 in 100 writers who can learn to see their own typos and the mistakes they edit in.


That's your opinion. As the OP stated,



> editing, like writing, is a skill and it can be learned.


That is a fact.

I wouldn't disagree with you if you said learning to self-edit wasn't easy -- it's not. But to say less than 1% of writers can learn that skill belittles the intelligence of, well, 99+% of writers.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

a_g said:


> So, what is the suggestion for those who simply do not have the money to drop on an editor?


Buy, borrow, or otherwise grab a copy of Self-Editing for Fiction Writers and/or James Scott Bell's Revision and Self-Editing for Publication. Either will give a writer willing to learn a ton of useful advice on how to self-edit. If the writer struggles with basic grammar and punctuation, there's no shame in grabbing a copy of Writing Fiction for Dummies. Some of us can use the reminders on the basics from time to time.


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Ted Cross said:


> I self-edit as well, because I'm good at it. Honestly I'd be shocked if any reader could find a single typo in my book (not saying it isn't possible, but I really would be shocked).


Can I take on this challenge? Oh wait what do I get if I find a typo or other error and is your book up for sale yet?


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I think there's good advice in here about the different ways people self-edit. I'm weighing in only because I have a little experience now from both sides, and perhaps it will be helpful to share. This is long. Read it or not--I'll never know! 

Up until my latest book, I'd always self-edited. I was a copyeditor or a manager of copyeditors for legal publications for 10 years, and edited my own work (copywriting--ads, catalogs, website copy, newsletters, etc.) for another 10. I used some of the techniques others have pointed out--multiple passes for different types of checks, reading on Kindle, computer, and paper (you find different things with each medium), etc. I also have up to 10 beta readers, some with professional editing experience, some who are meticulous line editors and others who are good at pointing out structural weaknesses. And I have about 70 ARC readers. In my latest book, they found three pesky typos, which I was able to fix prior to publication. I also edit and polish heavily as I go. By the time I publish, I've scrutinized each sentence probably 50 times. Literally.

And I sold. My first book, finally set to permafree about two weeks ago, has sold 80,000 copies in its U.S. Kindle version, another 4,000 or so in the brand-new German edition, and been a Top 10 bestseller in Contemp Romance on Audible. So--not Hugh Howey territory, but good enough, right? Close enough for ranch work, as we say in Idaho. Not bad for a self-edited first book, the first fiction I ever wrote, written in six weeks (but edited, again and again, in the months before publication, while I wrote and edited two other books. As I learned more, I applied those lessons to the book.) I don't get "needs editing" reviews (well, I've had a few people who didn't like my style, especially my sentence fragments, but ya know, people). One reason I never hired a copyeditor was that, to be frank, I'm a better copyeditor than most editors I know, and I wasn't sure how to find somebody who'd really be able to improve the books. I too have read self-published books that credited an editor and have found quite a few errors--mostly tense errors. (Past perfect! Past perfect!)

But...but...I felt like there was another level. I could tell I could get better, but that I'd need a really experienced pair of outside eyes to tell me exactly how. One reason I signed with Montlake was that I'd been told they did very good content editing as well as copyediting and proofreading. I wanted to see if I could learn more, could take my writing to the next level. 

So--just finished the content editing (developmental editing) part of the process. Four rounds of it. Yep. And it was pretty eye-opening. The editor was fantastic. She did what my toughest beta reader does, but she was able to point to specific places and specific ways I could improve the story. Here was a scene that I could lose to tighten the flow. Here was where I could provide more of the heroine's internal struggle, to clue the reader in. Here was where I was telegraphing too much of the suspense resolution. I ended up changing much more than she pointed out, because her comments made me realize on my own, for example, that I had a climactic breakup scene written all wrong. That an earlier scene needed to be more tender. And so forth.

And no, she wasn't pushing me toward any genre conventions or publishing-house "rules." Montlake doesn't do that. They let you write your book, the way you write it. She just helped me make my book tighter, the characterization stronger, the story arc more compelling.

So--I liked her enough that I booked her for my next project, as it's a very high-stakes box set in which I really, really don't want to embarrass myself. Her price for one round (as opposed to the four she did with me)? $2,000. And it'll be worth it. I probably still won't pay for copyediting, because she was able to point out things like repeated words, and my grammar, spelling, and punctuation are already very strong. 

So--if you CAN afford it, and if you can find somebody good enough to really take your work to the next level--I think it can definitely be worth it. Will I hire her for every book? Maybe not. I'm hoping that after three or four books (the Montlake books and the one I'm hiring her on privately), I'll have learned enough that I truly will be at a next level. But who knows--maybe so. 

Because now I can see so many things I could have done better in my other 11 books. Oh, dear. I wish I could go back and rewrite. Too late--many are already out in audio, and I have new books to write. I will just have to apply my better skills to the next books!

But--Yes. For two years, I self-edited. I spent (and still spend) $80 apiece on my covers. I published with a $1500 investment in three books--$300 for three covers and stock art, $1000 for a branded, professional, added-value author website and Facebook page. It can certainly be done. But outside editing isn't worthless either, even if you're already a very competent and successful writer. I won't discount the idea, either, that others here are already better writers than I am. That could certainly be the case. 

(And the reason, I imagine, that you aren't seeing a lot of people coming on here saying, "Yes, books need editors" is that very few people who sell extremely well are posting on KBoards anymore. I'm the only quite successful author I know who self-edits. I think the others hire editors for the outside-eyes thing, because it's more efficient, and because, yes, it does polish that book just that little bit more--that little bit that makes it more likely to become a bestseller.)

TLR: I have an editorial background and have always self-edited. I just had a content editor for the first time, and was able to improve my book considerably.


----------



## Amanda Hough (Feb 17, 2014)

EC said:


> It boils down to the OP can't afford an editor. What all self-editors miss is the insight of a third-party. it's that insight that can transform from mediocre to brilliant.
> 
> That's what you are paying for. And those of us that pay editors often say to ourselves -
> 
> ...


Well done Megan! You take the craft seriously. But I agree with EC. Having a good editor has very little to do with grammar. It's about getting the best you can out of the manuscript. A good editor is a writing partner, cheerleader, beta reader, publicist, critic and finally a proofreader. It can be an extremely rewarding relationship.


----------



## Amanda Hough (Feb 17, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> Can I take on this challenge? Oh wait what do I get if I find a typo or other error and is your book up for sale yet?


That's a great sales gimmick.


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Rosalind James said:


> I think there's good advice in here about the different ways people self-edit. I'm weighing in only because I have a little experience now from both sides, and perhaps it will be helpful to share. This is long. Read it or not--I'll never know!
> 
> Up until my latest book, I'd always self-edited. I was a copyeditor or a manager of copyeditors for legal publications for 10 years, and edited my own work (copywriting--ads, catalogs, website copy, newsletters, etc.) for another 10. I used some of the techniques others have pointed out--multiple passes for different types of checks, reading on Kindle, computer, and paper (you find different things with each medium), etc. I also have up to 10 beta readers, some with professional editing experience, some who are meticulous line editors and others who are good at pointing out structural weaknesses. And I have about 70 ARC readers. In my latest book, they found three pesky typos, which I was able to fix prior to publication. I also edit and polish heavily as I go. By the time I publish, I've scrutinized each sentence probably 50 times. Literally.
> 
> ...


IDK. I wish wish what you said was true Rosalind, but I look at the books that hit it out of the park sales wise and sometimes they do have the high next level of polish, but if I'm going to be honest most of the ones I read, I feel don't. This isn't to say that they're bad, but often while being SUPER readable and engaging they suffer when it comes to things like character arcs/pacing/etc. This isn't to say that these things don't matter, but I'm not sure if that next level of of polish really makes that much of a difference. But again, this is just my personal experience.

I spent 5x as much on my first book on editing as I did on my second. I used an editor much like your Montlake friend, expensive, but really pretty great. (It was about 500$ for 20k, and that was with a discount, normally he'd charge more. But keep in mind I don't write very clean AT ALL.) He (and this might've been the problem he was a fantasy more than romance editor) did a phenomenal job. But ALL of my readers like book 2 better. Even though IMHO book one has a much higher level of polish. So I don't know. At this point in time paying for that "next level editing" feels a little bit to me like an indulgence and less like an expense that really gives me great ROI.

In the future I might try and do a "next-level-polish" edit with a romance editor and see if that shows a big difference, but I'm skeptical. I also think it's really really hard to find a great editor. I found one, but he wasn't the perfect fit for my genre. (Paranormal Romance.) I will say that a great editor is super fulfilling to work with on a craft level though. However, at the end of the day the "meat" of the book is really on the author, and it's the meat that sells copies.


----------



## Christa Wick (Nov 1, 2012)

ebbrown said:


>


For me, it's can't remember which conjugation of lay, lie I need no matter how many times I read the rule.

But, hey, Eric Clapton supposedly got it wrong with Lay Down Sally and made it to #3 on Billboard top 100!


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

I am on my lunch break ( I will NOT spend all day on Kboards today. I will NOT spend all day on Kboards today.  ) and I just popped in to catch up. #1, I am now an abbreviated author. I have arrived. My ego thanks you. (EAW, you know you're someone when someone shortens you to your initials) LOL (I'm teasing, I'm not that egotistical, but it made me laugh)

#2 Sailing is a sport.

#3 I think the thread got back on track really nicely. Story and character and cover by far are going to be those really important factors that start a writing career. But as we write and make money, just like any business, you're going to need to reinvest some of that profit to move up tot he next level as Rosalind says. Once upon a time I really never planned to hire out. I do now not because I can afford it, but because I learned it helps me to write more to have others holding me accountable. But I'm unique in that my editor is mine. She only edits me. She's a long time reader (I'd say a professional) of all genres and she takes my stuff to a higher level than I could on my own. I have to stay in the mindset of "make words, make more words" because if I don't, I have that thing where I didn't write anything for 3 years happen again. This stuff isn't for the nervous or scared. 

When hiring an editor, there is a great deal of logistics and testing the waters to do. Always self-edit is about as helpful as go get an editor, any editor. It always come down to the individual project like others have said, the skills of the author (I'm seeing more and more of us coming from a news/nonfiction writing background hanging out here, squeeee!), and the expectations of your audience (are they going through your stories like tissue paper because they just want their next story fix, or are you writing the kinds of books people expect to spend a great deal of time inside, working and puzzling out the powerful prose?). They aren't always mutually exclusive expectations on a reader's part, the best book balance both, but there's also money to be made at the extremes of that scale, too.

With hard work and determination anyone can self-publish a story. Do your best, and that's the reward. Sales, accolades, none of that is anything we can control.  

Awesome, awesome thread Megan!  (Now everyone tell me to go away and don't come back, please.)


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Interestingly, I find that lots of my readers, especially, oddly enough, my most devoted ones, are quite critical of things like characterization and story arc. I write a little more of a mashup between Women's Fiction and Romance, I think, so perhaps that's why. I have quite a few readers who don't primarily read Romance, and I think they're more critical. 

And in any case--yes, I'd like to be a better writer, and I do think that improving will pay off. You never want to give anybody a reason to be pulled out of the story or to put down the book. I do work very hard while I write to make the story, the characterization, the very best it can be. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I can take that to X level. But it can sometimes take a pair of outside eyes to make you see (specifically, and in detail) what was in your own head but didn't make it onto the page. When I added those pieces, the story was much more satisfying.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I am on my lunch break ( I will NOT spend all day on Kboards today. I will NOT spend all day on Kboards today.  ) and I just popped in to catch up. #1, I am now an abbreviated author. I have arrived. My ego thanks you. (EAW, you know you're someone when someone shortens you to your initials) LOL (I'm teasing, I'm not that egotistical, but it made me laugh)
> 
> #2 Sailing is a sport.
> 
> ...


EAW, go away and don't come back for an hour.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Rosalind James said:


> But it can sometimes take a pair of outside eyes to make you see (specifically, and in detail) what was in your own head but didn't make it onto the page. When I added those pieces, the story was much more satisfying.


When I grow up and get your level of sales, Rosalind, I'm definitely going to see about getting a story editor. Or at least a team of beta readers other than my mother. 



MeganBryce said:


> (On my to-do list before publishing is to make sure I've given my main characters a hair color. Apparently, readers care about that sort of thing!)


I'm sparse like that too. I think out of all the characters I've ever written, maybe two have an eye colour.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

My (recent) first experience of reading something from an Amazon Publishing imprint was not impressive (especially on dialogue and not double telling). I have read Big 5 books that are in dire need of a good content edit, but that makes me think about past discussions on kboards about editing. It has been noted that the editing of a bestselling author deteriorates as their career goes stellar. Many of those authors will only ever have worked in the mainstream world. An editor can be reluctant to ask too much of a multiple best-selling author, especially if they have just taken over after an experienced editor that the author always worked with has retired. In such a situation an author who had self-edited earlier in her career would be in better stead, because she would provide better copy in the first place to the reluctant to criticise editor. 

This discussion is, as with everything in this industry, hugely genre dependent. I don't want an editor to tell me to tighten up the plot, because even when writing genre I am really still writing literary fiction. I don't want an editor to tell me what the style manual says because I am using my lyrical talents to destroy the presumptions of the style police. I don't want an editor to tell me to use less dialogue as I write character development via human interaction, which usually gets expressed via dialogue. I don't want an editor to tell me to use less introspection as that is kind of the whole point of literary fiction. I don't want an editor to tell me that a novel needs introspection, because if it's not there it's because I chose not to put it there. And I do not under any circumstances whatsoever want an editor to tell me that any book I or anyone else writes would read better in the present tense.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Rosalind James said:


> Interestingly, I find that lots of my readers, especially, oddly enough, my most devoted ones, are quite critical of things like characterization and story arc. I write a little more of a mashup between Women's Fiction and Romance, I think, so perhaps that's why. I have quite a few readers who don't primarily read Romance, and I think they're more critical.
> 
> And in any case--yes, I'd like to be a better writer, and I do think that improving will pay off. You never want to give anybody a reason to be pulled out of the story or to put down the book. I do work very hard while I write to make the story, the characterization, the very best it can be. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I can take that to X level. But it can sometimes take a pair of outside eyes to make you see (specifically, and in detail) what was in your own head but didn't make it onto the page. When I added those pieces, the story was much more satisfying.


It is probably very genre dependent. Obviously, everyone wants to take it to a higher level, but as others have said this is a business. Also with the super-quick turn-around for serials I just don't have another week I can give to a developmental editor.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> It is probably very genre dependent. Obviously, everyone wants to take it to a higher level, but as others have said this is a business. Also with the super-quick turn-around for serials I just don't have another week I can give to a developmental editor.


I agree re genre. And obviously, I'd be the last to say that everyone must hire an editor!

It does kill me, though, to think that I could have had even 5% more readers reading on in the series. Would have paid for that editor many times over. But at the time, I wouldn't have had the least clue of how to go about finding somebody that good--or the least clue that it could pay off. Hindsight 20/20 and all that!


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Go read Russell Blake's latest post. 

The big boys are coming out to play. 

Gone Girl at $2.99?

The indie pricing advantage has gone.

Rosalind James is showing the way. 

The best are reaching higher. 

Good enough will no longer be good enough.

The era of brilliance is upon us. 

Good news for readers. 

Bad news for the mediocre. 

And for those of you thwt deluded yourself that the Big 5 would never come to the party.

Too late. They are here. 

So self-edit to your hearts content. 

Teams of professionals will wipe you out. 

Bravo.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

EC said:


> Teams of professionals will wipe you out.
> 
> Bravo.


So do you have a timescale for this? Just so I can put my affairs in order and all that.


----------



## Ronny K (Aug 2, 2011)

If money were no issue, would you self-edit or hire out?


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

cinisajoy said:


> Can I take on this challenge? Oh wait what do I get if I find a typo or other error and is your book up for sale yet?


That's up to you, though what I wrote wasn't meant as a challenge but rather an honest response to people suggesting we can't be good enough at editing our own work. Many don't do a good enough job at it, but that doesn't mean we can't. I appreciate the kind remarks on the cover.


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

Ronny K said:


> If money were no issue, would you self-edit or hire out?


Of course I'd grab the best developmental editor I could, but the good ones are too expensive for me at this point.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Lydniz said:


> So do you have a timescale for this? Just so I can put my affairs in order and all that.


It's here - within weeks you'll see tons of "economically inactive, " Big 5 titles flooding in.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. Thanks--Betsy_


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

If you're not concerned then why post?

The big whomever are not doing ANYTHING different than they have done every single year for over a decade. They discount at Christmas the bestsellers from the year. Two Christmases ago, it was HUnger Games that was super cheap. Last Christmas was a discount on 50 Shades and Steve Jobs' Seriously. I know because I help run a book deal site. 

Every single MONTH traditional publishers discount big name authors. It's a discount. It's not the regular price. 

The sky isn't falling. The sun will come up tomorrow. And the day after that. And the day after that. And so on.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

For the record,
I have been finding big 5 books cheap and free for over a year.  Now did someone say there is a new Russell post?


----------



## Cege Smith (Dec 11, 2011)

EC said:


> Go read Russell Blake's latest post.
> 
> The big boys are coming out to play.
> 
> ...


I think we're all very clear on your opinion on this topic. It was in your very first post in the thread, and hasn't changed (not that I expected it to). So I'm just trying to figure out how this is even helpful. There's been some great (civil) dialogue on the topic at hand. You can keep saying you don't care what anyone else does, but you keep popping in here and commenting, and now I feel like this is a pithy scare tactic/warning that adds no value to the discussion.

I chose the indie path so I could be my own boss, so I could run my business the way I wanted, and so I could have the ability to flex and adapt as the market changes. We all knew that trad publishers would eventually start pricing in the place where indies have long held a foothold. That's a discussion that leads to ideas of new promotion and marketing techniques- and regardless of whether you self-edit or not it's a reality we all face right now.

I just don't understand why every topic has to turn into someone playing a superiority card lately. We're here to help each other and push each other up and forward. If you don't like someone's technique- don't do it. Walk away. Go find your tribe that agrees with you. Personally I think it's a good practice to think about what value you're adding to a conversation. I try to err on the side of "if I can't say anything nice or helpful- even if it's critical- then I don't say thing at all." Otherwise life's too short, and these were words that I could have dedicated to my WIP.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Here. DigitalBookWorld actually calculates the average price of the Top 100 Ebooks (not just Amazon, but the top 100 bestsellers everywhere). http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014/average-price-stays-low-as-ebooks-in-series-crowd-best-seller-list/

You can go back and look, every year this time of year, the average list price for the best seller list plummets by more than $2.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I've been finding big 5 bargain books as long as I've owned a Kindle (of course, at first, it was Amazon putting them on sale); it's nothing new.  I think when Amazon and the big 5 were actively feuding, there were fewer.

Betsy


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Ronny K said:


> If money were no issue, would you self-edit or hire out?


I'd continue to self-edit and hire a copy editor. For my short work, it doesn't make economic or time-sense to hire out--my craftwork and a couple trusted readers are enough.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

cegesmith said:


> We're here to help each other and push each other up and forward. If you don't like someone's technique- don't do it.


Amen to that. I'm very happy for all those of you who use editors. I'm quite sure they're worth every penny and improve your work no end. But (and let me whisper it) _there is more than one way to do things_.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks,

members here agree and disagree all the time.  That's fine.  Strong feelings are fine.  Let's keep the discussion on the topic, not each other.  And you know you don't have to respond to every post, right? 

Betsy

(And Jim, I appreciate that you appreciate our moderators. )


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Lydniz said:


> Amen to that. I'm very happy for all those of you who use editors. I'm quite sure they're worth every penny and improve your work no end. But (and let me whisper it) _there is more than one way to do things_.


Shoot, shout it to the rooftops. If more folks hear loud and clear that there are options for completing edits, covers, layouts, etc. etc. we can cut through the loud one-true-wayists and encourage more people to write and publish their work without fear.


----------



## Guest (Dec 12, 2014)

cegesmith said:


> I just don't understand why every topic has to turn into someone playing a superiority card lately.


Frankly, this thread started out with someone throwing down the superiority card. It was a "chip on the shoulder" post specifically designed to elevate the OP at the expense of looking down at people who prefer to use editors. There was a clear condescension in the tone directed at people who feel they need editors or who feel that editors bring value. As I said in my first post in this thread, NOBODY cares if you self-edit. Nobody really, genuinely, gives two cents if an author self-edits. It is not something people lose sleep over, think about during lunch, or worry over while commuting. Self-editing in and of itself has _never_ been a problem.

What HAS always been the problem is people who self-edit and then freak out at negative reviews or any criticism. What HAS always been the problem are people who self-edit because they already think they are perfect snowflakes and that readers should "ignore" any mistakes and just "enjoy the story." What HAS always been the problem are people who don't even know the difference between an editor and a proofreader and think editing is about catching comma splices, and then say "Well, I find typos in Big Five books all the time, so who needs editors?" Nobody cares if you self-edit. The problem is that if you self-edit, _take ownership_ of the problems that may cause if you turn out not to be as good at it as you think you are.

I do my own taxes. I would never start a thread that says "Why, yes, I DO file my own taxes" and then essentially insult both the people who chose to get a tax professional AND those professionals themselves. It would never occur to me to start a thread like that and expect people to cheer me, tell me how awesome I am, and shout "Me too!" Because who the heck cares if I do my own taxes? Maybe the same people who care whether or not an author whose books I have not read self-edits? I don't know.

Because it is almost 2015 and WHY IS THIS CONVERSATION STILL EVEN A THING? The only people who still talk crap about indie editing are indie authors themselves and third rate bloggers looking to create linkbait. I've been involved in self-publishing for over a decade, attended dozens of cons, book fairs, and conferences. NOBODY talks about editing in indie books any more except indies flogging themselves and linkbaiters.

_Post edited. If you have any questions, PM me. --Betsy_


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

I must admit, ignorance truly is bliss. I have no idea what most of the grammar rules are, and I don't care. I can't spell either...and I don't care. I have learned a few things along the way, but I have never read a book on writing, I don't follow all the cookie cutter rules, and...I don't care.

What exactly is self-editing? 

Is that where your read your book a few times and correct all the errors you can find? Don't we all do that? If you use proofreaders, then are you still self-editing? Or is self-editing just for content and flow, etc.? If so, then I self-edit too. I don't let anyone tell me how to write my books.

Here's the thing about editing. If you are not English perfect, your readers complain if you don't find someone to help you make it the best it can be. I learned that the hard way. Even after several rounds of editing and proofreading, someone still tells me they have read and love ALL my books, but boy there are a lot of errors. It's jarring, they say. I love that word, Jarring. Naught. So if it is so bad why did they read ALL of them? I don't get it.

I forgive these complainers for being English majors. We all gotta live in this world. I don't forgive them when the want to correct dialog or dialect. I was raised by teachers who taught me how to speak proper "American" English, but most people don't. If my character says "who," I am not going to change it to "whom" just because that's the rule.

My advice - Be creative, forget trying to stick to all the rules, and let the editors edit. I doubt you will ever regret it if you do, and there are plenty of low cost editor/proofreaders out there. Try searching for "freelance editors."

Marti Talbott


----------



## Cege Smith (Dec 11, 2011)

Regardless of the volatile subject matter, there are a ton of great nuggets of wisdom I've found in this thread- including a book recommendation that I plan to one-click on as soon as I hit post on this response. I'm glad the thread was started, so thanks to the OP for putting it out there.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Julie,

I don't see the superiority you are talking about. I do see a thread where the pros and cons of self editing vs hiring an editor are (mostly) being discussed openly and honestly.

You don't have to agree with posts. You don't have to find a topic worthy of discussion--in which case the best thing to do is to not discuss it. There are lots of other threads here.

Betsy
KB Mod

_Self-edited --Betsy_


----------



## KOwrites (May 23, 2011)

ellenoc said:


> I'm another self-editor, and one of my proofreading passes is always reading a printed copy backwards paragraph by paragraph. At this point, I'd be happy to pay someone else to do it. The problem is the few editors I'm sure would do a good job are busy and have to be scheduled. I don't write to schedule and don't want to wait once the book is ready. Also except for a very few, I have trust issues. There have been too many posts here and elsewhere along the lines of: "I paid $xxx for editing and am still getting reviews that say my book needs editing." There have also been a few posts along the lines of: "My editor says this is correct. Is it?" After that comes some ridiculously wrong example of punctuation or grammar.
> 
> As to my own, no, they're not perfect. If I go over one again a year after publishing I pick up another few typos. However, this is from our own Red Adept, who reviewed my mystery back in February 2010 not long after it came out and before she turned from reviewing to editing herself:
> 
> ...


I agree to most of your reasons for self-editing...And, _I_? _Self-edit._ Is this like standing up in a Twelve-step program?  I'm not disciplined about my schedule so having to schedule an editor in that process 3 months or 6 months out? No way. It doesn't work for me. I edit the WIP as I go along and then go back through the finished novel a number of times utilizing _Self-editing For Fiction Writers_' techniques as well as Elizabeth Lyon's _Manuscript Makeover_ process. I've gotten better at editing over the past three years. I used to hire someone to go back through my earlier books (paying for basic copy editing), but then I met up with WhiteSmoke editing software which made me a much better editor _and writer_ as you get reminded of the grammar rules while you write. That software along with the two editing books I mentioned above, and I'm good to go.

I'm going to try reading the printed copy backwards by paragraph for the next novel. (I always read the printed version and flag stuff and do the updates, but haven't tried backwards before this.) Beta readers (just a few) also catch stuff.

You won me over completely at the mention of diagraming sentences!!! I _loved_ doing that and wish they would still do this in English classes at all grade levels. _Truly!_

Thanks to the OP for the post.


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

Katherine Owen said:


> You won me over completely at the mention of diagraming sentences!!! I _loved_ doing that and wish they would still do this in English classes at all grade levels. _Truly!_


My 10th Grade English teacher made us diagram sentences every morning for grades. Most students seemed to dread him, but I think he taught me most of what I know about grammar. If they aren't doing this nowadays, shame on them.


----------



## KOwrites (May 23, 2011)

Ted Cross said:


> My 10th Grade English teacher made us diagram sentences every morning for grades. Most students seemed to dread him, but I think he taught me most of what I know about grammar. If they aren't doing this nowadays, shame on them.


I think my daughter did some of this in her seventh grade English class. I was stoked hoping the curriculum had reverted back to this type of teaching as well as good old Phonics. But no. She's in high school now (10th grade) and sentence diagraming is not done anymore. And creative writing? Forget it.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

One of the ways I try to make sense of the writing game is to compare it to other artistic endeavors. I think music is the most apt. I used to live with a drummer from a popular rock band, and I toured with them as a roadie and a gopher, attended practices, watched them move up from rocking garages to opening for major acts to staring in films. The comparisons are numerous, and they help make sense of a lot of these sorts of debates.

Randy, my roommate, could recover his own drums. This takes quite a bit of knowing and practice. Toby, the bassist, was a sound engineer. He could fiddle with amps and even resolder wires and tinker with the sound. Same for the lead guitarist, who experimented with custom-built pedals to create brand new sounds. The lead singer taught himself how to use a mixing board (later done on computers using Pro Studios). People go to college to learn how to do some of these things. The members of Charlie's On Acid tackled them out of a mix of passion and financial necessity. If you love what you do, that love will often spill over into ancillary areas of your work.

I think every author should learn as much as they can about paginating a book, about typography, about layout, about ebook coding, about retail algorithms, how to upload, how to sit at a craft fair and hand-sell books, how to run a reading discussion group or a writing critique session. They should try recording a short story and uploading it as a podcast. Shoot some video interviews or vlogs. Hire freelancers. Start an LLC. All of this. And all with the idea of mastering every bit of it.

I do these things because I love books and I love the written language. Not because these tasks are beneath me or because I'm unable to save up to hire out help. I read grammar books and typography books. I still do my own layouts. I play around with my own cover art. Because I enjoy it, and because I think it helps me in my writing career. This thread, I believe, was started in response to people (again) being rude about self-editing. It can be done and done well. It's also great to hire others to do the things that you're weak at doing.

I never hired a cover artist or an editor until after I quit my day job and was making a full-time living with my writing. There's nothing wrong with that. It's also not the way everyone should go about it. Musicians often work their way up, self-record, self-criticize, self-produce, and get better at all these things until they're able to hire out studio time and a professional producer. This is art. It's okay to get dirty, to embrace the hiss and pops and static along the journey. Everyone is going to find their own way, and those saying it's not possible can just be ignored. Forget them. Groove on.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Hugh Howey, I could HUG you right now.  

I think we're all more comfortable as artists when we find at least one other person like us. Those of us who are here on Kindleboards likely heard more times than they'd care to have heard that they were weird, different, odd, or maybe even not cool. Whether we were the weird kid reading at recess (guilty) writing our own stories at lunch (again, guilty) or just the kid who's essay was always used at the example of what the teacher was looking for on the overhead projector, it's lonely. And we're all so insecure because that comes when you're making new stuff up all the time. 

Few come here looking to say "I'm better than you" I think they come to legitimately ask some variation of "Am I still weird or is there someone here like me?" When we talk to one another, we learn things. Like I wouldn't be working with an editor if someone long ago hadn't mentioned it as a time saver. At the time (3 years ago) I couldn't see a reality where that would work for me. I also didn't see a reality where I would write 6 books in 6 months. But, when I did fall into that later reality, I remembered the piece of advice about how bringing the RIGHT people onto your team can make life easier. 

(And I've done 2k more editing so I AM working while I lurk, good author today.  )


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Okay, I have to ask: what the heck is sentence diagramming? (Double m - I'm British)


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

Sam Kates said:


> Okay, I have to ask: what the heck is sentence diagramming? (Double m - I'm British)


In my teacher's case it was putting up one sentence on the board each morning (and the sentences became harder over time) and having us list out (generally above each word) every single grammatical point we could. He took a point off for each thing we missed. A single sentence could sometimes have a hundred or more things to list, at least once they became more complex.


----------



## KOwrites (May 23, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> One of the ways I try to make sense of the writing game is to compare it to other artistic endeavors. I think music is the most apt. I used to live with a drummer from a popular rock band, and I toured with them as a roadie and a gopher, attended practices, watched them move up from rocking garages to opening for major acts to staring in films. The comparisons are numerous, and they help make sense of a lot of these sorts of debates.
> 
> Randy, my roommate, could recover his own drums. This takes quite a bit of knowing and practice. Toby, the bassist, was a sound engineer. He could fiddle with amps and even resolder wires and tinker with the sound. Same for the lead guitarist, who experimented with custom-built pedals to create brand new sounds. The lead singer taught himself how to use a mixing board (later done on computers using Pro Studios). People go to college to learn how to do some of these things. The members of Charlie's On Acid tackled them out of a mix of passion and financial necessity. If you love what you do, that love will often spill over into ancillary areas of your work.
> 
> ...


Amen.


----------



## Guest (Dec 12, 2014)

carinasanfey said:


> Actually, I think this thread started out in response to other posters yelling at people who confessed to self-editing.


But what I have seen is that generally, when people "yell" about "confessions" regarding self-editing, it has much more to do with the _reasons_ why a person self-edits, or the _behavior_ of the person who says they are self-editing, than the actual activity itself.

Self-editing simply because you can't afford it? That's a bad reason in and of itself. You are asking people to spend their money on your book. You have an obligation to make sure it is something worth spending money on. This is a business, and you should invest in your business. That doesn't mean you have to spend $2000 on a professional editor. But it does mean maybe you find a mentor willing to work with you, or you swap services with a fellow author whose opinions you trust, or you supplement content editing with strong beta readers who can articulate the things that need to be worked on. And honestly, a great many people who say they "self-edit" actually don't. They are in fact doing these things but have internalized the idea that an editor is a person you have to write a large check to and thus they are self-editing. Someone need not have business cards that say "editor" to be your editor, so long as you trust that person's judgment.

Self-editing because you think an editor will "destroy my story!"? That is a ridiculous reason to self-edit. Most of the people who verbalize this excuse have never even worked with an editor and are just parroting the horror stories that their friend's cousin's brother's neighbor's nephew's college roommate told them. They don't understand that the editorial process is a give-and-take. That it is OK to disagree with your editor and that the idea is that you _should_ question, ask, challenge. And they should challenge you. If you are confident in your work, nobody can "destroy" your story. And if you AREN'T confident in your work, you are deluding yourself if you think you can self-edit.

If you are self-editing because you genuinely have a fondness for the process and you are one of those people that diagrams sentences in your free time, nobody is going to "yell" at you for that. No sane person that matters, anyway. If your readers are not complaining about the quality of your books, and YOU are not whining about bad reviews telling you that you need an editor, nobody would even know you were self-editing unless you told them. And I can't imagine why you would feel a compulsion to tell people if your readers are happy and you aren't getting bad reviews.


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Ted Cross said:


> In my teacher's case it was putting up one sentence on the board each morning (and the sentences became harder over time) and having us list out (generally above each word) every single grammatical point we could. He took a point off for each thing we missed. A single sentence could sometimes have a hundred or more things to list, at least once they became more complex.


Thanks, Ted. Do you mean labelling each word or punctuation mark? Like: noun, verb, conjunction, preposition, object, subject, past tense, comma, full stop (i.e. period - like I said, I'm British), and so on. I can see how that could become quite an exercise with more complex sentences.

Never heard of that before. Not sure that we do that over here. We certainly didn't in the schools I attended.


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

Sam Kates said:


> Thanks, Ted. Do you mean labelling each word or punctuation mark? Like: noun, verb, conjunction, preposition, object, subject, past tense, comma, full stop (i.e. period - like I said, I'm British), and so on. I can see how that could become quite an exercise with more complex sentences.
> 
> Never heard of that before. Not sure that we do that over here. We certainly didn't in the schools I attended.


Yes, though it gets more complex (and we didn't have to label the periods and commas and such). We had to detail out parts that go together as well, such as prepositional phrases and what parts were what within them. Compound sentences were fun. I actually found the exercise to be fun once I became good at it.


----------



## Guest (Dec 12, 2014)

MeganBryce said:


> This is funny. It reminds me of an article I read about the Ninc conference this year and how it was so geared toward self-publishers, for the first time ever, that it was an insult to the writers who were on the traditional path. Talking about self-editing is not an insult to any one else and this is a thread about self-editing...so that's what we're going to talk about because *admitting* to self-editing *on this board* is a problem. A few days ago, another thread I was posting on was getting derailed because I was not careful. I knew not to say anything that could remotely be taken as pro-self-editing but I did anyway. How do I know to be careful? Because I, and every other self-editor if you'll take the time to reread the last 7 pages, has been jumped on.


Megan, my issue is that your post doesn't read like "Self-editing works best for me because..." it reads like "anyone who isn't self-editing is lazy because you can and should learn how to do it yourself." THAT is the fundamental problem I have with the tone of the original post and the thread. Whenever someone uses a phrase like "it isn't surgery" or whatever, there is a clear condemnation involved. Just because something doesn't require eight years of higher education doesn't mean the work put forth by people in that profession is not valuable. It doesn't mean that everyone can learn the skills, nor does it mean that everyone should feel obligated to.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Sam Kates said:


> Thanks, Ted. Do you mean labelling each word or punctuation mark? Like: noun, verb, conjunction, preposition, object, subject, past tense, comma, full stop (i.e. period - like I said, I'm British), and so on. I can see how that could become quite an exercise with more complex sentences.
> 
> Never heard of that before. Not sure that we do that over here. We certainly didn't in the schools I attended.


I think we call it parsing a sentence. But we never did it when I was at school in the 1970s. (ALL RIGHT SO I'M OLD.)


----------



## Ted Cross (Aug 30, 2012)

carinasanfey said:


> In addition, several people have mentioned using a team of strong beta readers as part of their self-editing process.


I had more than two hundred people read at least parts of my book, and about twenty critiqued the whole thing. Some were more valuable than others, and those really great critters became great friends!


----------



## Guest (Dec 12, 2014)

carinasanfey said:


> This is why I self-edit, and I've been angrily yelled at on these boards for it.


I would say that if someone is actually "yelling" at you because of this, that really is not someone worth the effort of starting a whole new thread over. Expending energy on people like that simply gives them power and creates the false "us versus them" mentality that just makes a mess of everything.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> If you are self-editing because you genuinely have a fondness for the process and you are one of those people that diagrams sentences in your free time, nobody is going to "yell" at you for that.


I self-edit (or at least self proof-read - I won't comment on the other types of editing) because I have never yet found anybody who is better at it than me and it would stick in my craw to pay someone to leave in a load of typos.


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Ted Cross said:


> Yes, though it gets more complex (and we didn't have to label the periods and commas and such). We had to detail out parts that go together as well, such as prepositional phrases and what parts were what within them. Compound sentences were fun. I actually found the exercise to be fun once I became good at it.


Dangling modifiers and the like? I can see that such an exercise would have a great many benefits, though wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea. I rather wish we'd done it in school. Probably tells you everything you need to know about me.


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Lydniz said:


> I think we call it parsing a sentence. But we never did it when I was at school in the 1970s. (ALL RIGHT SO I'M OLD.)


No, we didn't. (All right, I'm old too.)


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Hugh Howey, I could HUG you right now.
> 
> I think we're all more comfortable as artists when we find at least one other person like us. Those of us who are here on Kindleboards likely heard more times than they'd care to have heard that they were weird, different, odd, or maybe even not cool. Whether we were the weird kid reading at recess (guilty) writing our own stories at lunch (again, guilty) or just the kid who's essay was always used at the example of what the teacher was looking for on the overhead projector, it's lonely. And we're all so insecure because that comes when you're making new stuff up all the time.
> 
> ...


I am not weird. Just because I told some ditzy PE substitute teacher that no my feelings are not hurt that I am picked last and why are you being so mean to the others. I know I am lousy at sports. Now excuse me, I will be behind the backstop reading until I absolutely must get up to bat.
Ok maybe I am weird. But I have finally found my tribe.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

cinisajoy said:


> I am not weird. Just because I told some ditzy PE substitute teacher that no my feelings are not hurt that I am picked last and why are you being so mean to the others. I know I am lousy at sports. Now excuse me, I will be behind the backstop reading until I absolutely must get up to bat.
> Ok maybe I am weird. But I have finally found my tribe.


Move OVER Cinisajoy, you're hogging the only part behind the backstop that doesn't have an ant hill!


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Self-editing simply because you can't afford it? That's a bad reason in and of itself. You are asking people to spend their money on your book. You have an obligation to make sure it is something worth spending money on. This is a business, and you should invest in your business. That doesn't mean you have to spend $2000 on a professional editor. But it does mean maybe you find a mentor willing to work with you, or you swap services with a fellow author whose opinions you trust, or you supplement content editing with strong beta readers who can articulate the things that need to be worked on. And honestly, a great many people who say they "self-edit" actually don't. They are in fact doing these things but have internalized the idea that an editor is a person you have to write a large check to and thus they are self-editing. Someone need not have business cards that say "editor" to be your editor, so long as you trust that person's judgment.


Hmmm. Some writers genuinely don't have the funds to pay a professional editor. (As for the people out there calling themselves editors and then insisting that "I feel fine." He said. is correct, best not go there.) Some writers don't know any authors ( I didn't, either online or in real life) when they start out. Some writers don't have beta readers (I didn't even know what one was when I started out). Such writers, in order to fulfill that obligation to the reader (that I fully agree exists), have no choice but to do the job themselves. Or don't publish. Some would say that's the better option in some cases, but who are we to cast that judgement? It's for readers to make that call.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Ted Cross said:


> In my teacher's case it was putting up one sentence on the board each morning (and the sentences became harder over time) and having us list out (generally above each word) every single grammatical point we could. He took a point off for each thing we missed. A single sentence could sometimes have a hundred or more things to list, at least once they became more complex.


Ah. In Britain that is known as parsing a sentence, which I was taught at age 10 to my everlasting benefit.



Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I would say that if someone is actually "yelling" at you because of this, that really is not someone worth the effort of starting a whole new thread over. Expending energy on people like that simply gives them power and creates the false "us versus them" mentality that just makes a mess of everything.


It was not some one, but some several. As it always is. Once one bully starts the mob forms. Then the editors sniff a sale and then come into a writers' cafe telling us what to do. Sometimes when you are in a minority that gets rained on all the time you try to move under shelter, although a few of cloud warriors came in here anyway.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Let me reiterate my earlier post.
If you don't know the basic grammar rules, hire at the very least a proofreader or go to your local college and talk to either the GED or ESL people.    Note it will also benefit those programs because it shows usage.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer (May 14, 2014)

Great discussion, guys. 

IMHO self-editing is frowned on so much because some people are still used to how things used to be. When we had to look for publishers, and make it past the numerous gatekeepers (agents, editors, etc).

We live in the DIY age. People are making millions on YouTube. Stuff like that wasn't possible a few years ago. If they wanted to entertain people they had to move to Hollywood/NYC, and pray that someone would take a chance on them.

The same thing happened with music. Some of today's biggest bands got their start on Myspace. 

If you're good enough to edit your own work -- great! If not, read a few books, get some beta readers, and keep practicing. Hire an editor if you can afford it. I think it's a huge mistake for new writers to pour thousands of dollars into their first book (unless they have money to blow).


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

Re diagramming - this doesn't look exactly like what I remember doing, but it's close. Different teachers probably throw in their own variations, and of course my education was back in the Dark Ages.

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/diagrams2/one_pager1.htm

It helps with understanding compound structures and what modifies what, whether adjective/adverb or clauses. Ted seems to be describing something a bit different that has the same purpose.


----------



## Thisiswhywecan&#039;thavenicethings (May 3, 2013)

Sam Kates said:


> Okay, I have to ask: what the heck is sentence diagramming? (Double m - I'm British)


http://www.german-latin-english.com/diagrams.htm


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Hugh Howey said:


> One of the ways I try to make sense of the writing game is to compare it to other artistic endeavors. I think music is the most apt. I used to live with a drummer from a popular rock band, and I toured with them as a roadie and a gopher, attended practices, watched them move up from rocking garages to opening for major acts to staring in films. The comparisons are numerous, and they help make sense of a lot of these sorts of debates.
> 
> Randy, my roommate, could recover his own drums. This takes quite a bit of knowing and practice. Toby, the bassist, was a sound engineer. He could fiddle with amps and even resolder wires and tinker with the sound. Same for the lead guitarist, who experimented with custom-built pedals to create brand new sounds. The lead singer taught himself how to use a mixing board (later done on computers using Pro Studios). People go to college to learn how to do some of these things. The members of Charlie's On Acid tackled them out of a mix of passion and financial necessity. If you love what you do, that love will often spill over into ancillary areas of your work.
> 
> ...


<3


----------



## Shannon C (Nov 15, 2014)

ellenoc said:


> Re diagramming - this doesn't look exactly like what I remember doing, but it's close. Different teachers probably throw in their own variations, and of course my education was back in the Dark Ages.
> 
> http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/diagrams2/one_pager1.htm
> 
> It helps with understanding compound structures and what modifies what, whether adjective/adverb or clauses. Ted seems to be describing something a bit different that has the same purpose.





ReGina W said:


> http://www.german-latin-english.com/diagrams.htm


Thanks for these! We had to diagram sentences in middle school, and I remember it being a lot of fun.  Sadly, that was a long, long time ago, and I couldn't remember all the details of exactly _how_ to do it.


----------



## Bluebonnet (Dec 15, 2013)

Sam Kates said:


> Okay, I have to ask: what the heck is sentence diagramming? (Double m - I'm British)


http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/diagrams2/one_pager1.htm
This site has 50 examples of sentence diagramming, progressing from simple to complex sentences.

I had to do tons of sentence diagramming in high school, and I learned to enjoy it. I still do it mentally when I write.

ETA: Oops, I didn't see that Cactus had already posted the diagramming link. Here's a different link to a site that has diagramming worksheets and answers for practice.
http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/sentences/free-diagramming-sentences-worksheet.html


----------



## Colorwheel (Nov 21, 2014)

Sam Kates said:


> Hmmm. Some writers genuinely don't have the funds to pay a professional editor. (As for the people out there calling themselves editors and then insisting that "I feel fine." He said. is correct, best not go there.) Some writers don't know any authors ( I didn't, either online or in real life) when they start out. Some writers don't have beta readers (I didn't even know what one was when I started out). Such writers, in order to fulfill that obligation to the reader (that I fully agree exists), have no choice but to do the job themselves. Or don't publish. Some would say that's the better option in some cases, but who are we to cast that judgement? It's for readers to make that call.


Thank you. You get it.

If my book sank ripple-free because I couldn't afford an editor, so be it. But the $2-5k that I do not have is not a statement that I Just Don't Care Enough. I can't care so hard that cash falls from the sky. Money does not work that way.

And hey, if anyone has a dozen peers in my city, in my non-existent genre, on my level of newbishness, I will trade services with them in a heartbeat. All I know IRL are old hands, and they have their support network already, so there's no point in yammering about craft with some newbie. "Go network" is more complicated than it sounds. Yeah, just get a mentor! Oh, is that all!?


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Writers are doing themselves a huge favor by learning enough about their own language and fiction writing to be able to copyedit their own work, whether they plan on hiring an editor or not. I've seen so many writers baffled at the complaints about errors and grammar in their published books. "But I paid an editor hundreds of dollars!"

Awwww. You got robbed, son, and it's your own fault. What do you expect if you don't know your own language well enough to recognize errors? How did you determine that editor was right for you without seeing before and after edited prose? You have to at least know what should be edited, in general, to judge whether or not your editor does a decent job. And if you know the language well enough, you can self-edit to a pretty high degree of proficiency if you want to.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Colorwheel said:


> Thank you. You get it.
> 
> If my book sank ripple-free because I couldn't afford an editor, so be it. But the $2-5k that I do not have is not a statement that I Just Don't Care Enough. I can't care so hard that cash falls from the sky. Money does not work that way.
> 
> And hey, if anyone has a dozen peers in my city, in my non-existent genre, on my level of newbishness, I will trade services with them in a heartbeat. All I know IRL are old hands, and they have their support network already, so there's no point in yammering about craft with some newbie. "Go network" is more complicated than it sounds. Yeah, just get a mentor! Oh, is that all!?


You know what, no matter what you do--whether you self-edit because you can't afford an editor, or you sell your plasma to pay for one, or you workshop it to death--there will be some self-appointed expert happy to tell you just exactly how badly you're doing it wrong. My very favorite things are the people who said "you're doing it wrong" to or about writers who ended up becoming very successful. Some people even have the confidence (arrogance?) to point at people who are currently successful, usually far more successful than they are, and talk about just how badly they're making a muck of everything. It's downright amusing.

Too many writers worry far too much about what other writers are doing. I don't care how somebody edits or whether they do or whether their books sell. Why should I? I also don't care what they think of my methods. As long as they work well for me, *hand waves*

Don't sweat it.


----------



## Shannon C (Nov 15, 2014)

Colorwheel said:


> If my book sank ripple-free because I couldn't afford an editor, so be it. But the $2-5k that I do not have is not a statement that I Just Don't Care Enough. I can't care so hard that cash falls from the sky. Money does not work that way.


This. Exactly. You do the best you can with what you have. It's not a character flaw to not have the money. Do I think hiring an editor is a good idea for some people? Sure. Do I think at least having a trusted friend proofread is a good idea for a lot of people? Definitely. Before I publish my first book, I'll seek out a developmental editor if I think it's absolutely necessary can afford one. But I'll have my sister proofread it, and then I'll proofread it myself.

And oh, if only money did work that way!


----------



## Lehane (Apr 7, 2014)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I would say that if someone is actually "yelling" at you because of this, that really is not someone worth the effort of starting a whole new thread over. Expending energy on people like that simply gives them power and creates the false "us versus them" mentality that just makes a mess of everything.


This seems like a silly, almost dismissive comment considering the thread's trajectory. A lot of people have responded with praise/thankfulness toward this thread for highlighting the discussion. It seems like it was well worth the effort of starting a whole new thread -- it helped people feel supported, started a (largely interesting and reasonable) discussion about types of editing and methods/reasons behind self-editing, and has a lot of viewpoints offering their two cents. It is, on whole, one of the more successful threads on the topic, which is unusual for KBoards some days.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

This one... really the whole WRITE GREAT FICTION Series rocks. It has specific exercises to do.

http://www.amazon.com/Write-Great-Fiction-Revision-Self-Editing-ebook/dp/B005GXQXUM/ref=pd_sim_kstore_4?ie=UTF8&refRID=1T6H9Y6ZNFQDKFHQW5W7


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Colorwheel said:


> Thank you. You get it.
> 
> If my book sank ripple-free because I couldn't afford an editor, so be it. But the $2-5k that I do not have is not a statement that I Just Don't Care Enough. I can't care so hard that cash falls from the sky. Money does not work that way.
> 
> And hey, if anyone has a dozen peers in my city, in my non-existent genre, on my level of newbishness, I will trade services with them in a heartbeat. All I know IRL are old hands, and they have their support network already, so there's no point in yammering about craft with some newbie. "Go network" is more complicated than it sounds. Yeah, just get a mentor! Oh, is that all!?


Yeah, I get it - I was describing myself back when I first self-published two and a half years ago, and now when I am published with a small press and still can't afford a professional editor.

I keep hearing that there are plenty of affordable 'editors' out there. True - trouble is that many of them know little more than what MSWord's spellchecker tells them, and some of them don't even know that much. I'd rather trust my manuscript to the 'hundred chimps with typewriters' than allow one of those charlatans anywhere near it. (I am not in any way seeking to denigrate the people plying their trade as editors or proofreaders or whatever who know their stuff - there are some worthy folk out there if you can find them.)

As for the rest of it - mentors, proofread-exchangers, critique circles, etc. - yeah, sigh...

... first, as an almost complete unknown, befriend someone (even harder, lots of someones), whose standards you feel match or exceed your own, or who has been there and done it (and who isn't seeking to impose his/her own standards, which may vary significantly from those required to meet your own goals). Second, get that person to run the risk of stalling their own career to mentor/critique/whatever you. Third, use them as unpaid 'editors' and thereby turn out the perfect book. Fourth, wake up in the shower as Bobby Ewing...

[edited for typos - one of the first things to go when you pass your late forties is your eyesight]


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

What's that line from the Alanis Morissette song? Something about good advice that you just can't take?  

I follow Hemingway's advice on editing: Every day I read over the entire WIP, or if it's gotten to the point where that's impractical, the last two or three chapters, making edits as I go. By the time I get to 'The End' it's already a relatively clean draft.

Then I go over everything twice more, once looking for continuity and other issues, and once as a basic proofread. Then I print the whole damn thing out, separate it into individual chapters, and do it all again chapter by chapter, but backwards, starting at the end. By the time I finish, I have lots and lots of paper airplane material.

Do I still find the occasional missing speech mark after that? Yes, I do. But damned few.

Would I pay for a proofreader if I knew one that I could trust? Probably, if it wasn't too dear or took too long to get the ms back. But I'm not about to waste time or money on a developmental editor, or 'trying out' proofreaders until I found one that was professional and competent.


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

ellenoc said:


> Re diagramming - this doesn't look exactly like what I remember doing, but it's close. Different teachers probably throw in their own variations, and of course my education was back in the Dark Ages.
> 
> http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/diagrams2/one_pager1.htm
> 
> It helps with understanding compound structures and what modifies what, whether adjective/adverb or clauses. Ted seems to be describing something a bit different that has the same purpose.


This is the way I learned to diagram in school, too. I was in school in the early 60s. So, if you who were there in the 70s are calling yourselves old, then I must be an antique.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

MeganBryce said:


> Was this the James Scott Bell book that was mentioned? I didn't catch a title and I see he has a few interesting ones.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Revision-Self-Editing-Publication-Transforming-ebook/dp/B00B03HSEW?tag=kbpst-20


That's it. The red cover is the second edition. I have the older version, with the orange cover. Time to upgrade!

I'd also recommend Bell's The Art of War for Writers. Not about revision per se, but a lot about getting into a great writerly mindset.


----------



## rjspears (Sep 25, 2011)

This a great thread.  I need to learn how to self-edit because, frankly, I can't afford an expensive editor.  (I can operate my writing at low revenue, but I can't operate at a loss -- which is what I've been doing.)  I've been using a good friend as a proofreader and that's helped a lot.  I actually do pretty okay on grammar, but it's missing words and a few typos that kill me.  

I need to learn how to do this.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

I love your covers, rjspears!


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

Sapphire said:


> This is the way I learned to diagram in school, too. I was in school in the early 60s. So, if you who were there in the 70s are calling yourselves old, then I must be an antique.


I'm probably a touch antiquey-er because I was done and out working i the 60's.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Can I just weigh in with my one experience in being edited? It was actually when I was on Law Review. I was published, and I edited that thing down eight ways to Sunday. I must have spent 1,000 hours on that project that seemed so massive to me, but was probably only around 20,000 words (it was 55 pages single spaced in the book, so it wasn't nearly as long as the the things that I write now). It was kinda my baby, really.

Then the editor got ahold of it. She apparently decided to SUBSTITUTE her writing style for my own, because, I swear to god, she changed every.single.sentence. And suddenly my writing was stilted. Lifeless. It was a truly awful experience. She would literally string together like ten of my sentences into one long run-on sentence, when she wasn't chopping up my work into a series of short sentences that had no transitions between them.  

I read her changes and blew a gasket. I almost pulled the entire thing, even though it was my dream to be published, because I didn't want people thinking that it was I who didn't know how to write. I ended up compromising with the editor-in-chief, who agreed to keep about half of her changes. I still wasn't happy, though.

Not that this experience is the sole reason why I now self-edit. I think that the main reason why I self-edit is because, like a lot of posters have said, I don't have the discipline to schedule one in. Once I'm done with a WIP, I want to get it out and get it gone. I have zero desire to wait six weeks for a good editor to make the changes, assuming that I could even find a good editor. But my earlier experience has certainly soured me on the entire editing process. No thanks. 

And I do get the occasional ding about editing, so I am getting a proofreader. But that's as far as I'll go.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

I used to self-edit, but then I realised I was spending so much damn time doing it and that it was much better to hire someone. IMO it's not really about the good old"you can never edit your own work" schtick. There are ways to do it. Having your work read aloud, reading it aloud yourself, reading it a chapter at a time starting from the final chapter, etc. etc.

It's that to do it well costs a lot of time. I don't have time. I sell books, so I have money. I give it to my editor so that he's happy, and I can start writing the next book.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

Patty, you were active on the OWW site, correct? Spending a year there for a novice writer is worth at least an associate's degree in genre fiction editing, in my opinion. Or at least it used to be.


----------



## Anna Drake (Sep 22, 2014)

If you're feeling a little rusty with the rules, the Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue is a great resource. The link goes to their punctuation page, but be sure to use the search function. There's a lot of good, free information there.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/1/6/


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

anniejocoby said:


> Then the editor got ahold of it. She apparently decided to SUBSTITUTE her writing style for my own, because, I swear to god, she changed every.single.sentence. And suddenly my writing was stilted. Lifeless. It was a truly awful experience. She would literally string together like ten of my sentences into one long run-on sentence, when she wasn't chopping up my work into a series of short sentences that had no transitions between them.


I have a very specific taste in erotic romance and erotica. It's hard finding books and authors to read, because it's not a mainstream taste, and I'm always very happy when I meet with a voice I love telling stories I'm interested in. Maybe one in 200 different authors is what I look for.

It has now happened several times in a row that I found such a writer, bought books by them, then they suddenly sign with a publisher, and their output changes significantly in tone and content. So much in fact, twisted into such a mainstream direction, that I'm vastly disappointed in the books they publish after they get "professionally" edited.

One particular publisher is truly obnoxious, as after books are put through that wringer they all sound exactly the same. Edgy, harsh, super-gritty, faux-realistic - and the authors all have lost their original voice. I happen to know that their chief editor behaves pretty much the way you detailed here.

Someone else stated further ago in this thread that editing is a recent, mainly anglo-saxon invention. That's correct. It also is always the question what the editor wants to achieve. In the above case they turned authors serving niche audiences into mass products. I wouldn't, personally, count that as an improvement. It probably is one all the way to the bank, though.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

There's a big difference though, between A) being edited by a publisher's editor and B) hiring your own editor.

When you hire your own editor, you are the boss.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Michael McClung said:


> Patty, you were active on the OWW site, correct? Spending a year there for a novice writer is worth at least an associate's degree in genre fiction editing, in my opinion. Or at least it used to be.


I was a super-critter at SFF-OWW for four years. I worked up a tally of 1600 crits in that time. Then I went and did a stint of slushing/editing with a genre magazine. I'd say stuff like that is virtually mandatory if you want to be able to spot your own foibles.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Cherise Kelley said:


> When you hire your own editor, you are the boss.


That doesn't help if the advice you get from the editor is bad. This editor does freelance work, their freelance stuff is changing authors' voices and content the same way as those they do for the publishing house. They probably don't even consider what they do as something negative. After all, they lower the common denominators - to the taste of the masses.


----------



## thewitt (Dec 5, 2014)

Nic said:


> After all, they lower the common denominators - to the taste of the masses.


I would say a more accurate statement is they lowered the common denominator to the taste of the publishing house.

For me, I wrote it. I edited it. I published it. I'm marketing it.

If it fails, I'll try something different, but I really have no interest at this time for an editor or publisher to tell me what they want. It's my book, and it will be what I want. If I guessed right, enough readers will want it to make it a viable product.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> I was a super-critter at SFF-OWW for four years. I worked up a tally of 1600 crits in that time. Then I went and did a stint of slushing/editing with a genre magazine. I'd say stuff like that is virtually mandatory if you want to be able to spot your own foibles.


Critique Circle and Sf workshop are both great tools. But Sf didn't work with romance for me.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons (Jun 2, 2011)

MeganBryce said:


> Them (I'll attribute if you'd like me to):


Nah, I'll just do it myself. This thread may be mostly "done" but since my words were used as part of the original post, I'm going to comment anyway, now that I've seen this thread.

My original comment was in a thread where an author was being shamed (with references to _begging_ and suggestions to get a _sugar daddy_) for thinking outside the pay-per-unit corporate box while considering alternatives for raising funds for future creative projects. I think that's relevant regarding comments in this thread about arrogance, "attacking" or "yelling" behavior, etc. This author expected to pay for an editor, using a Not-Community-Approved method of raising funds (patronage of the arts--shocking!), and some of the responses were very negative. Apparently, "attacking" goes both ways.

But the main discussion here is editing one's own work in lieu of hiring an editor, regardless of funding. In response to the comment that "editing can be learned," I said:

[quote author=crenel]
So can eye surgery, or embalming. Just because a skill can be learned does not mean you should expect to get good results performing it on yourself. Even a great editor should not edit his or her own work; good editing requires detachment from the manuscript, something the author _can not achieve_.
[/quote]

I didn't mention surgery in general, I mentioned _eye_ surgery for a reason. It was the same reason that I referenced embalming. (I think somebody may have missed an important point there, so: You might teach yourself embalming but _you can't embalm yourself_. At least not literally and completely. Whiskey consumption doesn't count.)

The reason I chose those skills -- both skills that can be learned, just like editing -- is that they require the *ability to see what you're doing*. You can't fix what you can't see. If you try to operate on your own eye, you're not going to be able to see what you're doing to complete the task. (This is an assumption on my part. I've never had eye surgery. I think it's a reasonable guess, though, and even if I'm wrong at least the point can hopefully be understood.) If you're dead, you can't see what you're doing to embalm yourself, not to mention other technical difficulties you would face that aren't relevant to this discussion.

My assertion is that the person who wrote the manuscript will know what they _meant_ to write, and, lacking the detachment of an editor, that knowledge predisposes the writer to see what they _think_ they wrote, even if that's not what they _actually_ wrote. This is not just about language mechanics, it's about everything. It might be the use of "to" instead of "too" (a frustratingly-common typo of mine), it might mean using the wrong character's name, it might be a continuity error. Whether you want to delve into "editing vs proofreading" or not, having a second set of eyes and a fresh brain improves the odds (but does not guarantee) that flaws will be detected.

Presumably most people here have seen examples of intentionally-scrambled text that is still easily read. Now imagine if that text was something you wrote, and instead of being heavily scrambled, it was just an instance of "you" where you think you wrote "your" -- are you going to catch that missing 'r' or will it be filled in by your brain? It might go either way. If you do the reading-backward trick (something my mother told me about years ago), your odds are probably much higher, but that is a much slower process than having someone else read it and catch it at first glance (which, I understand, is not guaranteed).

You can believe that your results editing your own writing will be equivalent to the results of hiring a qualified editor, but I think this is in denial of how we process language. Studies could examine the efficacy of properly-trained editor-writers editing their own work, but lacking such completed research this does come down to belief (you believe you can, I believe you can't), so it makes sense to "agree to disagree" and move on.

Regardless, I'm not saying anyone _must_ hire an editor, expensive or otherwise. I'm not say that judging your work's quality only by your bottom line is wrong (but I will point out that anecdotes regarding sales volume answer the wrong question). These are personal decisions, and I'm not here to dictate anything to anybody. However, you won't fix problems you fail to detect, this much is demonstrable. It's up to you whether fixing them is important at all, how important it is, and what you're willing to invest to make it happen.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

> You can believe that your results editing your own writing will be equivalent to the results of hiring a qualified editor, but I think this is in denial of how we process language. Studies could examine the efficacy of properly-trained editor-writers editing their own work (...)


Quick question: When you say editor, do you mean proof reader? Because the above and the three paragraphs that precede it seem to address the difficulty in catching (your own) errors in a text.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons (Jun 2, 2011)

Michael McClung said:


> Quick question: When you say editor, do you mean proof reader? Because the above and the three paragraphs that precede it seem to address the difficulty in catching (your own) errors in a text.


I know it can be more specifically defined (proofreading vs editing, and different types of editing), but in this case I'm crowding proofreading under the general "editing" umbrella. I don't mean _just_ proofreading -- at least not how I understand it, i.e., focused on language mechanics -- but I do mean catching errors of all types.

I don't mean non-error-related edits (e.g., "I think it would be better if Timmy wasn't so malicious"), and I realize now that I wasn't clear about that in this thread or in my referenced comment in the other thread. I think there's value in that kind of editing, to the extent that paying for it could make sense, but I think it would be harder to make a claim that it's necessary to get the best results.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Michael McClung said:


> Quick question: When you say editor, do you mean proof reader? Because the above and the three paragraphs that precede it seem to address the difficulty in catching (your own) errors in a text.


Michael, you got it in one.

Crenel, a slower question- edit this piece by an impoverished author:

"- I am the resurrection and the life. That touches a man's in most heart.
- It does, Mr


Spoiler



Bloom


 said.
Your heart perhaps but what price the fellow in the six feet by two with his toes to the daisies? No touching that. Seat of the affections. Broken heart. A pump after all, pumping thousands of gallons of blood every day. One fine day it gets bunged up: and there you are. Lots of them lying around here: lungs, hearts, livers. Old rusty pumps: damn the thing else. The resurrection and the life. Once you are dead you are dead. That last day idea. Knocking them all up out of their graves. Come forth, Lazarus! And he came fifth and lost the job. Get up! Last day! Then every fellow mousing around for his liver and his lights and the rest of his traps. Find damn all of himself that morning."

Anyone who edits that is a fool who is messing with literary genius. Fortunately the author was neither Anglo-Saxon nor recent.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons (Jun 2, 2011)

Mercia McMahon said:


> Michael, you got it in one.
> 
> Crenel, a slower question- edit this piece by an impoverished author:


What, exactly, is your point?

Last I checked we were discussing whether writers should rely on only themselves to edit their own works. Asking me to edit something written by someone else is off-topic at best and can certainly be viewed as a personal attack, especially since you follow it with "anyone who edits that is a fool."

(Edited for clarity.)


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

I think Mercia's point was that if James Joyce hadn't self-edited, we would not have the literary genius that is James Joyce. But I don't want to speak for Mercia.

As for my point, I suppose we can agree to disagree. If you choose to believe it is impossible for a writer to effectively edit themselves, nothing I say will convince you. But for others who might be on the fence, I'd like to say this:

It isn't easy. It takes a lot of practice, and a lot of discipline, and a lot of patience. You need to realize when your mental acuity is starting to resemble warm cookie dough and take a break. Then you have to come back to it, over and over again. But if you're in a situation like I have been for most of my life, and paying for an editor just isn't in the cards, *you can do it yourself*.

Don't let anybody tell you different.


----------



## PearlEarringLady (Feb 28, 2014)

Crenel said:


> You can't fix what you can't see.


And this is the salient point, isn't it? Even though, as you say, the thread is almost done, it's worth restating. And a couple of pages earlier, Megan said something very similar, in the context of developmental editing:



> I'm wondering if the things they help you with are the things that you really do need someone else to point out because you never would have seen yourself. There are things not-so-great about my stories and I can see them; are there things not-so-great that I can't see?


Not stirring, here, just pointing out that (when the dust settles) there's not really so much difference between the two viewpoints.

And one thing that everyone agrees on: editing is an essential part of the publication process.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Because, Crenel, you chose to come into a thread for those happy to self-edit and give absolutist advice to those who have made quite clear that it is unwelcome. James Joyce during his lifetime was basically uneditable - he became editable after his death because he was no longer around to say, "No, I meant to write it like that." Of course the editing that people tend to propound on kboards barely existed during Joyce's lifetime.

I set you an impossible task to illustrate your lack of qualification to write about editing, especially evident in the following:



Crenel said:


> My assertion is that the person who wrote the manuscript will know what they _meant_ to write, and, lacking the detachment of an editor, that knowledge predisposes the writer to see what they _think_ they wrote, even if that's not what they _actually_ wrote.


It won't wash to excuse this as:


Crenel said:


> I know it can be more specifically defined (proofreading vs editing, and different types of editing), but in this case I'm crowding proofreading under the general "editing" umbrella. I don't mean just proofreading -- at least not how I understand it, i.e., focused on language mechanics -- but I do mean catching errors of all types.


Editing is not proof-reading.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Wow, a lot of discussion going on in what are the wee hours here on the US east coast...

I don't see absolutist advice, Mercia, I see an opinion on whether someone can catch all of one's own errors one's self.  Opinions have been given on both sides throughout the thread, and even some who self edit have said that perhaps not all are caught, but as a cost-benefits analysis, it's good enough..

Agree to disagree...

Betsy


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons (Jun 2, 2011)

Mercia McMahon said:


> I set you an impossible task to illustrate your lack of qualification to write about editing....


Thank you for confirming that it was a personal attack. I'll agree to disagree with your assessment of my qualifications.



Mercia McMahon said:


> Editing is not proof-reading.


A large part of this thread is talking about proofreading in the same context as editing.


----------



## zoe tate (Dec 18, 2013)

Crenel said:


> A large part of this thread is talking about proofreading in the same context as editing.


Yes, it _certainly_ is. (Though, to be fair, the same comment also applies to countless other forum threads, here. I don't suggest that that mitigates its validity as an observation, of course).


----------



## Kirkee (Apr 2, 2014)

Not even the amazing filmmaking genius Akira Kurosawa, who directed arguably the greatest film ever made: The Seven Samurai, did everything by himself. Even Orson Wells had help.

Many, to this day, consider Hemingway (For Whom the Bell Tolls)
                                        James Jones (From Here to Eternity)
                                      F. Scott Fitzgerald ( The Great Gatsby)
                                        Thomas Wolf (Look Homeward Angel)
to be great writers. As accomplished as they were, they didn't think that they were so good as to not allow someone else, another pair of eyes, go over their work. Who was their editor? A man whose skill was as great at what he did as theirs was at their ability to craft fine literary works, namely Maxwell Perkins.

Self-editing works for you? Fine. Shouldn't even be an issue. Some of us type so fast we miss things––and know it. And do not mind paying an editor. My last editor overlooked quite a few things that I picked up on while re-reading my novel. Since I decided to re-write some of the passages anyway, and did, I employed another editor to go over the book. So that was $750 for the first edit; another grand for the second. Was it worth it? Absolutely. Why do it? Out of respect for my readers, and because I take pride in my work. 
There simply is no way that I can catch everything. I might be able to catch errors in your manuscript, but can't in my own. Just the way it is.

It probably shouldn't even be an issue. Do what's right for you. Don't want to pay someone else to go over your work (for whatever reason), so be it. Do it yourself. My general attitude is this: people who think they are good at everything, usually aren't very good at anything.
How's that?
Humans aren't perfect.
Even though some of us might think we are.   

I don't format, either. That's someone else's expertise. Same regarding cover. I let a pro do it. My job is to write. Period. That's something I have always loved and will keep on doing myself.


----------



## KOwrites (May 23, 2011)

thewitt said:


> I would say a more accurate statement is they lowered the common denominator to the taste of the publishing house.
> 
> For me, I wrote it. I edited it. I published it. I'm marketing it.
> 
> If it fails, I'll try something different, but I really have no interest at this time for an editor or publisher to tell me what they want. It's my book, and it will be what I want. If I guessed right, enough readers will want it to make it a viable product.


THIS. This is exactly where I'm coming from. Whether it be simple copy editing or the arduous task of developmental editing, I don't want nor hire for that. Instead, I do it my way. I write novels the way I want and readers read and seem to love them regardless. I don't do this simply because I can sell it. I do this writing thing because I want to as much as I need to.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

MeganBryce said:


> I'm sorry, Betsy. I know you told us to move on already but I did quote Crenel in the OP, so I feel like I need to respond.


Debate and discussion without personal comments addressed to each other are fine...it's when the personal comments start that I ask people to agree to disagree.

You're fine, Megan.

Betsy


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Crenel said:


> What, exactly, is your point?
> 
> *Last I checked we were discussing whether writers should rely on only themselves to edit their own works.* Asking me to edit something written by someone else is off-topic at best and can certainly be viewed as a personal attack, especially since you follow it with "anyone who edits that is a fool."
> 
> (Edited for clarity.)


Actually, that's not what we've been discussing at all. Stop making this something it's not. _The topic is that one can learn to edit._ Not that no author should ever get an outside person to edit/copy edit/proofread. Why not say something about the members coming here and saying you must hire an editor? That's an absolute statement with no basis in fact.

It's one thing to come into a thread and pounce on someone who is doing something you don't agree with. You are entitled to your own *OPINION*. As we've seen, many people like to do that. But I notice not a single one of them has said a word about what Hugh Howey wrote, which is basically what we've been saying here, nor have they responded to Rosalind. Why is that?

Sins of the Writer

Thou Shalt Not admit to self-editing.
Thou Shalt Not admit to writing fast.
Thou Shalt Not admit to not promoting.
Thou Shalt Not admit to writing for money.​
Betsy, I don't mean any disrespect, but sometimes the mods see what they want to see. I've seen many threads like this, and it almost always comes down to those of us having to defend ourselves against outright disrespect if not attacks on our abilities, motives and right to publish as we see fit being told to agree to disagree.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

> The topic is that one can learn to edit. Not that no author should ever get an outside person to edit/copy edit/proofread.


This. So, so much this. That some people cannot learn to self-edit? I grant that. That no one can learn to self-edit? Just. Not. True.



> But I notice not a single one of them has said a word about what Hugh Howey wrote, which is basically what we've been saying here


You noticed that, too? I think it's human nature to ignore facts that run contrary to our beliefs, but you have to try really, really hard to ignore Hugh Howey. Like, pathologically hard.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons (Jun 2, 2011)

Michael McClung said:


> ...but you have to try really, really hard to ignore Hugh Howey. Like, pathologically hard.


For my part, I joined this thread to answer the OP specifically. You can label "not answering every other participant in this very long thread" to be "ignoring" them if you wish, but to be fair that means I "ignored" EC just as much as I "ignored" Hugh.

Also for my part, I'm done with this thread.


----------



## H. S. St. Ours (Mar 24, 2012)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> ...and even some who self edit have said that perhaps not all are caught, but as a cost-benefits analysis, it's good enough..


You cut to the core exactly, Betsy. As always. 

Although I do a pretty good job of self-editing and proofreading, if I do say so myself, many of us who "do it all" only do so because of cost. I, for one, would love the input of an experienced editor on the off-chance he/she could catch continuity errors, perhaps, or inquire about suspect wording, and I would love a professional illustrator to interpret these crazy ideas I have for a cover refresh. But when you're starting out and/or sales are slim, and trad publishers aren't falling all over you, it can become an issue of cost v benefit.

For now, my readers are happy (I have learned a great deal in the last few years about auteuring digital publications, thanks in large measure to the KBoards family), and that's good enough for me.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

she-la-ti-da said:


> Sins of the Writer
> 
> Thou Shalt Not admit to self-editing.
> Thou Shalt Not admit to writing fast.
> ...


Uh oh. I always knew I was bad to point of approaching evil, but this confirms it. I'm guilty of 3 of the 4, and the only reason I'm not guilty of the writing fast one is I'm lazy, which isn't exactly a virtue.


----------



## Rachel Aukes (Oct 13, 2013)

This is a great post. When I started reading through the replies, on a few I thought, "Hey, I don't agree with that." And, then I thought, "Duh, I don't have to agree!" After all, writing is far more than science - it's full of magic. The only universal law (if you plan to publish your work) is to deliver a product as good as you can deliver at that moment. How you get to that end-state doesn't matter. There are so many different paths to getting our work to our readers today, and it's glorious. I love that each writer can have his/her own process. We need to adjust our individual processes based on our own strengths and weaknesses (and time, funds, and resources).

For my novels, I work with a content (developmental) editor. On my first book, she pointed out entire chapters that were unnecessary. Now, the letter I receive from her is under a page. I've learned a lot, but I also don't think there will be a time I won't _want _the benefit of a content editor. After I've polished the story through several drafts (and have feedback from betas), I'm too close to it. My content editor helps point out problem spots that I don't notice (such as when a beloved character acts out of character during a particular scene). Maybe she's my safety blanket, but right now, I still crave that extra pair of eyes on my long fiction. Short stuff? Nah, no content editor. I go straight to copy edits.

After I make my content edits, depending on the length story, I will either send it to my editor to copy edit, or I'll do it myself. I have the fundamentals down, but if it's a full novel, I have her do it to save me time. Any shorter stuff, I go ahead and do it. l I have to work a day job, and tend to value my time over money.

When that's all done, and I've read the story out loud, I send it to my proofreader. This is one person I would never, ever leave out of my process. I SUCK at proofreading my own stuff. It's my kryptonite. No matter how hard I try, I skim over my own errors. I learned that the hard way the first time I self-published and hurriedly had the book proofread and re-published.

That's my process. It wouldn't be the best way for 99% of you, but it works for me. It helps me ensure that what I publish is the best that I can do, and that's all that matters. So, whether you completely self-edit, completely hire out, or somewhere in between, kudos for working out a process that is right for you.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I would say that if someone is actually "yelling" at you because of this, that really is not someone worth the effort of starting a whole new thread over. Expending energy on people like that simply gives them power and creates the false "us versus them" mentality that just makes a mess of everything.


I've been yelled at because I DO prefer an editor and I don't think the average writer is objective about their own work, so editors add perspective. It's my opinion. I could care less if someone else is pro self-editing until I buy their book and all the typos distract me, or there are huge loop holes in the plot and I've waited too long and can't return it. Then I mind. I also really mind when authors say things like, "Who cares if there are typos as long as my book sells?" I've seen a lot of writers with this attitude on these threads. The answer is I care, because I could have spent my money to support a writer who cares if they sell me substandard material. I've actually put writers who I've never bought but might have on my do not buy list because they are very open about only caring about sales, not the craft of writing itself. I self-edit my short stuff. I still miss a typo here or there even after going over it 5 times. I would never do a long story without someone else looking over it. It's just my opinion, but to each their own. One more thing, though, I think authors using the excuse that you find mistakes in trad pubbed books is the biggest cop out. I read a lot of trad pubbed books. Once in a while I find a typo, like ten times my whole life one really jumped out at me, and never tons in one book like I see with some indies.


----------



## Maggie Dana (Oct 26, 2011)

On a slight tangent but germane to the need for another pair of eyes, does anyone besides me get the banner ad for Scrivener at the foot of most pages and wonder why there's a very tiny, lower-case f at the bottom left corner?


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Maggie Dana said:


> On a slight tangent but germane to the need for another pair of eyes, does anyone besides me get the banner ad for Scrivener at the foot of most pages and wonder why there's a very tiny, lower-case f at the bottom left corner?


Yes! What is up with that little f ?


----------



## Maggie Dana (Oct 26, 2011)

Cherise Kelley said:


> Yes! What is up with that little f ?


Maybe it's there to irritate writers.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

Hugh Howey said:


> One of the ways I try to make sense of the writing game is to compare it to other artistic endeavors. I think music is the most apt. I used to live with a drummer from a popular rock band, and I toured with them as a roadie and a gopher, attended practices, watched them move up from rocking garages to opening for major acts to staring in films. The comparisons are numerous, and they help make sense of a lot of these sorts of debates.
> 
> Randy, my roommate, could recover his own drums. This takes quite a bit of knowing and practice. Toby, the bassist, was a sound engineer. He could fiddle with amps and even resolder wires and tinker with the sound. Same for the lead guitarist, who experimented with custom-built pedals to create brand new sounds. The lead singer taught himself how to use a mixing board (later done on computers using Pro Studios). People go to college to learn how to do some of these things. The members of Charlie's On Acid tackled them out of a mix of passion and financial necessity. If you love what you do, that love will often spill over into ancillary areas of your work.
> 
> ...


This is pretty much the only thing that needs to be said on the subject of not only self-editing, but also designing your own cover, doing your own formatting, etc. It's not for everyone but there are people who can do it, and it's wrong to just assume that because they're doing it themselves that they're doing it poorly.


----------



## thewitt (Dec 5, 2014)

rachelaukes said:


> On my first book, she pointed out entire chapters that were unnecessary.


Which is still just her opinion after all.


----------



## AlexBrantham (Feb 27, 2014)

Katherine Owen said:


> THIS. This is exactly where I'm coming from. Whether it be simple copy editing or the arduous task of developmental editing, I don't want nor hire for that. Instead, I do it my way. I write novels the way I want and readers read and seem to love them regardless. I don't do this simply because I can sell it. I do this writing thing because I want to as much as I need to.


Agreed.

Perhaps this is some of my old (pre-writing) life coming into play, but I see a lot of things in life through a prism of Risk - life is all about taking and managing risks, and it's the people who get this right who are successful (however they choose to define that).

The trend to ebooks and print-on-demand, for example, has changed the way book publishing works precisely because it has taken a lot of risk out of the system (the upfront cost of printing and distributing thousands of books that you're not quite sure will be sold).

Deciding to self-publish is about taking over a lot of risks that once were the preserve of publishers, and hoping to collect the reward that comes with managing those risks well.

And, finally coming back on topic (hopefully), deciding to not to contract out any of the tasks associated with publishing is about making risk/reward decisions. I do particularly like the idea that by keeping a closer control on the editing process, the writer can take more creative risks than would be possible if the forces of convention smothered it.

Sure, a lot of the time it might not come out very well. The result is not a disaster, just a few more books on the great pile of unbought ebooks in Amazon's hard drives. But, every now and then, something really good will emerge, and we will all be better off for it.

Hooray for taking risks.


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

katrina46 said:


> I've been yelled at because I DO prefer an editor and I don't think the average writer is objective about their own work, so editors add perspective. It's my opinion. I could care less if someone else is pro self-editing until I buy their book and all the typos distract me, or there are huge loop holes in the plot and I've waited too long and can't return it. Then I mind. I also really mind when authors say things like, "Who cares if there are typos as long as my book sells?" I've seen a lot of writers with this attitude on these threads. The answer is I care, because I could have spent my money to support a writer who cares if they sell me substandard material. I've actually put writers who I've never bought but might have on my do not buy list because they are very open about only caring about sales, not the craft of writing itself. I self-edit my short stuff. I still miss a typo here or there even after going over it 5 times. I would never do a long story without someone else looking over it. It's just my opinion, but to each their own. One more thing, though, I think authors using the excuse that you find mistakes in trad pubbed books is the biggest cop out. I read a lot of trad pubbed books. Once in a while I find a typo, like ten times my whole life one really jumped out at me, and never tons in one book like I see with some indies.


That's not what this thread is about. I'm not going to read back through 11 pages to check, but I don't recall anyone arguing that it's acceptable to publish unedited and unproofread books, full of typos and inconsistencies. The point is, I think, that self-editing is a skill that some writers can acquire, whether through choice or, in some cases, necessity.


----------



## MyraScott (Jul 18, 2014)

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I've not seen an exchange where anyone was yelled at for wanting or using an editor. From what I've seen, the non-editor people do not insist that people using editors must stop immediately! They are ruining the craft! Making the world of self-publishing a slimier and more unattractive place!



> I've been yelled at because I DO prefer an editor and I don't think the average writer is objective about their own work, so editors add perspective. It's my opinion. I could care less if someone else is pro self-editing until I buy their book and all the typos distract me, or there are huge loop holes in the plot and I've waited too long and can't return it.


See, it's not "using an editor" that's confrontational, it's the fact that in the same sentence, you are telling us that "average writers" aren't objective about their work and then you go on to say how annoying it is when a book isn't edited.

And you _could care less_, which says you do care if someone is pro-self editing. (A good editor could catch that slip for you...) It's like you are waiting to prove those heinous self-editors wrong.

For the record, I do have an editor and rely on her feedback, but really dislike authors telling other authors what they "have" to do. The game is changing. Huge best selllers are full of weak plots, terrible writing and bad grammar.

*Because most people (even those who read a lot) don't notice.*

They don't know grammar. They don't know homonyms. They spell that way themselves. They don't care. They like the story. They buy it and they buy the next one and the next one and the next one and they are entertained and happy.

The world does not (and will not) adhere to your personal standards of what writing should be. Without the gatekeepers, floods of unedited books are finding their audiences. Quite a few sit in obscurity, purchased only by family and friends- better editing won't make those books best sellers. But some rise to the top on a wave of fans clamoring for more. Even while some of those fans complain about the editing, they're still going to buy the next book. And the next book. And the one after that.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

FWIW, as a reader. . . . . I don't see how this sentence:

*Because most people (even those who read a lot) don't notice.*[weak plots, terrible writing and bad grammar]

is any less objectionable than

I don't think the average writer is objective about their own work.

It seems to me that, in the first one (that you bolded; I included the bit in [] to make it clear what (I think) you are referring to), you're making a blanket statement that I don't agree is necessarily true. I think it is true that SOME people don't notice such things I think _most_ people probably do notice, but it just doesn't bother them. Some of those it bothers ENORMOUSLY!  I admit to extrapolating that conclusion from people I know IRL -- it's possible we're not a representative bunch. 

In the second, the writer is offering only her own opinion. And it is, in fact, an opinion I agree with.  I don't write for money, but I did a lot of writing in high school and, especially, college . . . . if it was going to be turned in for a grade, I did a lot of proof-reading and self-editing but you can bet I had someone else read it as well. And I did the favor for other friends. And that wasn't creative stuff, even, more in the nature of 'reports'. I was never any good at _creative writing_ and don't enjoy the exercise. But I expect if you are writing something that's come completely from YOU, it would be natural for you to have trouble remaining objective about whether it's good, bad, or indifferent. I think you're probably going to be harder on yourself than you have to be, or not see where things aren't clear because, after all, you know what you meant. 

I've no doubt that such skills can be learned . . . . . but as a reader I don't care about how the sausage is made, I just want it to be juicy and delicious when I get it. If it's mealy and dry and flavorless, I don't buy that brand again. 

So. The above commentary is not meant to be anything more than my own personal opinion.


----------



## Michael McClung (Feb 12, 2014)

> I'm going to borrow and slaughter one of Michael McClung's titles and say it's because I like to spit in good luck's eye and I uploaded a preorder at Amazon... and no, the book's not done #panic


Mwahahaha


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Can someone please find me this report on how readers don't care about spelling and grammar?  

I might give you that someone that reads 1 book a month might not care but the voracious readers do.
Oh and most people I know that don't understand homonyms and grammar do not read.

Now please point me to the nearest best seller that has errors on every page.


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

Maggie Dana said:


> On a slight tangent but germane to the need for another pair of eyes, does anyone besides me get the banner ad for Scrivener at the foot of most pages and wonder why there's a very tiny, lower-case f at the bottom left corner?


Ah, that little fat-finger is a sure sign that Harvey shouldn't play with HTML after midnight. 

Fixed!


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Sam Kates said:


> That's not what this thread is about. I'm not going to read back through 11 pages to check, but I don't recall anyone arguing that it's acceptable to publish unedited and unproofread books, full of typos and inconsistencies. The point is, I think, that self-editing is a skill that some writers can acquire, whether through choice or, in some cases, necessity.


Actually, I don't blame you for not reading all 11 pages(more now) but there has been quite a lot of discussion along these lines.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

MyraScott said:


> I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I've not seen an exchange where anyone was yelled at for wanting or using an editor. From what I've seen, the non-editor people do not insist that people using editors must stop immediately! They are ruining the craft! Making the world of self-publishing a slimier and more unattractive place!
> 
> See, it's not "using an editor" that's confrontational, it's the fact that in the same sentence, you are telling us that "average writers" aren't objective about their work and then you go on to say how annoying it is when a book isn't edited.
> 
> ...


I think the proof that readers care is the thousands of reviews where readers bring it up. I've even seen some ask if the book was written by a second grader. And as I said I don't care until I buy the book. Then I have the right to care. It was my money. I was expecting a professionally written book.


----------



## Cactus Lady (Jun 4, 2014)

Sam Kates said:


> That's not what this thread is about. I'm not going to read back through 11 pages to check, but I don't recall anyone arguing that it's acceptable to publish unedited and unproofread books, full of typos and inconsistencies. The point is, I think, that self-editing is a skill that some writers can acquire, whether through choice or, in some cases, necessity.


I'm also not arguing that readers don't care about mistakes and badly-written books. Neither is the OP.

Books need to be well-crafted and they need to be edited to be as mistake-free as humanly possible.

My position is that whether or not a writer hires an editor, they still need to have the knowledge and skills to do these things on their own because producing a well-crafted story in competently-written prose is a writer's job, and so that if they do hire an editor they can make sure they're getting their money's worth. Maybe not everyone wants to self-edit or has the time or is able to train themselves to the necessary state of objectivity about their work. But some people do enjoy doing it and have the time, or have to self-edit out of necessity, and are able to teach themselves to do it. Just because someone can't/doesn't want to hire an editor doesn't mean they don't care about putting out the highest quality of work. I, for one, care very much.


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

katrina46 said:


> Actually, I don't blame you for not reading all 11 pages(more now) but there has been quite a lot of discussion along these lines.


Ah. Well, just for the record, I certainly wasn't arguing that it's acceptable to put out books riddled with errors and inconsistencies. As a reader, which I very much am, probably more so than a writer, such books make my eyes ache. But provided the book I'm reading is error-free*, I don't care in the slightest how it was edited - by a team of professionals or by the writer on his/her own.

*error-free: whether the book is trad- or self-pubbed, I can forgive 3 or 4 typos in a full-length novel - so maybe one per 20,000 words. Any more than that, I start to squirm and find myself looking out for the next error instead of enjoying the story.


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Kyra Halland said:


> Just because someone can't/doesn't want to hire an editor doesn't mean they don't care about putting out the highest quality of work. I, for one, care very much.


Yep. Me, too.


----------



## a_g (Aug 9, 2013)

Seems to me there is a lot of conflating "I don't use an editor, I self-edit" with "putting unedited crap out there". You know, that's true that there's a lot of unedited stuff out there. But it's not an all or nothing pile. It's not EDITED VS. UNEDITED ... FIGHT! So if someone doesn't pay an editor but they use everything else at hand, why are some in this thread continuing to act like it hasn't been edited _at all_?

If someone uses a beta, are they edited or self-edited? Amateur edited? What if that beta isn't paid but services are exchanged? At what point is it more 'acceptable' to be considered 'properly edited' along this spectrum of:

self-edit -> self-edit using tools available (books, software, changing font/reading format, etc) -> unpaid beta reader -> services exchanged beta reader -> hiring less expensive editor for one of the trifecta of editing services (copy, proof, or development) -> full service editing service

A lot is getting lost in this discussion when people start waving their arms and not even defining what it is they consider a proper edit, only clearing their nose at people who fall beneath this 'line' of appropriate editing.

To be fair, some people are qualifying what they consider 'proper edit'. Many appear to be too willing to throw 'not an acceptable level of editing effort' under the bus and dismiss as unedited.

*edited:*

A thought occurred to me while I was washing the dishes.

Is it just me or does this entire topic, and the endless back and forth, smack of 'you're self-published? oh, then you're not _really_ published'?


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

a_g said:


> Is it just me or does this entire topic, and the endless back and forth, smack of 'you're self-published? oh, then you're not _really_ published'?


Not exactly, but it's obviously only a topic for the self-published. The traditionally published get whatever editing they get from the publisher and most of the agonized mentions I see have to do with editors wanting changes the author doesn't want, not line editing and proofreading (although I've seen complaints about that from those pubbed with small presses).

When it comes to editing as in line editing and proofreading, I think downloading a sample (I have dial up internet so the look inside feature doesn't do it for me) is pretty predictive. Heck, sometimes the blurb will tell you the book is going to be sloppy, although I admit if there's an error in a blurb I never look further so I haven't tested that theory.

What neither the sample nor the blurb tells is whether the story is worth a darn, and too many times I've bought something after a good sample only to find the story fails. That's one of the reasons I love the much-hated KU - I can download the whole book and abandon it where it fails without financial consequence. Too often I've bought after a decent sample only to have the story fall apart somewhere after that and after I've paid for it. I suppose that's failure of developmental editing, which I suspect is the one most indies are least able to pay for or find adequate help with although IMO a whole lot of traditionally published books fail in that regard too. I use beta readers who love my genre for that kind of feedback.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

katrina46 said:


> I think the proof that readers care is the thousands of reviews where readers bring it up. I've even seen some ask if the book was written by a second grader. And as I said I don't care until I buy the book. Then I have the right to care. It was my money. I was expecting a professionally written book.


I have a book that was written and illustrated by a 5 year old. It is adorable. It is or was also for sale on Amazon.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

JanaOnWheels said:


> http://www.amazon.com/Fifty-Shades-Grey-E-James-ebook/dp/B007J4T2G8/


This book does not count. Show me others lol. If Oprah recommended them, that doesn't count.

Oh crabs, I did say best seller. 
YOU got me. 
Any other examples other than the obvious.


----------



## thewitt (Dec 5, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> This book does not count. Show me others lol. If Oprah recommended them, that doesn't count.


Ha ha ha. Convenient.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

thewitt said:


> Ha ha ha. Convenient.


Do you have other examples? 50 shades doesn't count because every author uses it as an excuse.
Besides I said a list not just one book. And it is well proven that if Big Name Talk Show Host recommends a book, it will be bought at least 100,000 times. Note I did not say read.
I want 10 traditional books that have major errors (not just sentence structure) like homonyms, possessive, contraction, singular, plural errors. 
Must also be a best seller preferably NYT.
Ya'll started this so show me the proof.
The book must have at least 1 error per 1000 words.


----------



## thewitt (Dec 5, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> Do you have other examples? 50 shades doesn't count because every author uses it as an excuse.
> Besides I said a list not just one book. And it is well proven that if Big Name Talk Show Host recommends a book, it will be bought at least 100,000 times. Note I did not say read.
> I want 10 traditional books that have major errors (not just sentence structure) like homonyms, possessive, contraction, singular, plural errors.
> Must also be a best seller preferably NYT.
> ...


What a dishonest argument.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Time out: no one needs to provide any proof. . . . Cin, you asked for an example, one was given, and you deemed it not valid. So, as far as I'm concerned, that's the end of the discussion.

Further comments on that aspect will be deleted -- failure to curtail discussion may be deemed 'refusal to accept moderation' -- which can result in a ban.

If someone has something NEW to say about the pros and cons of acting as your own editor, go ahead.  Frankly, the horse seems pretty dead to me.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Speaking of editors I think I need one for my posts since I typed one thing but wanted to say something else.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

I think that the OP has a valid point and approach.

Yes, some writers possess enough editorial background and skill that they can edit themselves.

I've paid for editing on some of my books. Others (the eight-hour fiction shorts, mainly) I have edited myself.

My results so far?

My two earliest books, where I entrusted the editing to others, have had to be re-uploaded at least three times each, because I trusted those editors too much and they missed things.

I'm not saying they weren't good editors. By and large, they were extremely helpful. But hiring an editor is no guarantee of flawlessness.

What helps most, in my view? Multiple sets of eyes.

I've worked in publishing for a few years, and I can tell you that the bigger the publishing house, the more sets of eyes that a manuscript passes in front of, pre-publication.

That's what gave birth to ARCs and the like, in fact. I once had an opportunity to submit ARC feedback (following attending an ABA show in Minneapolis) on Kiss the Girls by James Patterson. I found a few things and sent them to the publisher, as requested in the ARC. It was fun.

Multiple sets of eyes, feedback from people outside of your own head, is something you can find without spending $100s or $1,000s. Heck, Amazon's Write On site is a good place to find feedback for WIPs.

But hiring one editor is just ONE extra set of eyes, and all eyes are created human.  Which means none of us catches everything.

And editors, like writers, can sometimes make suggestions that aren't on target, just as easily as they can catch things that ARE on-target.

But here's the thing... Those two first releases where I spent the most on editing? Are the ones I've had to republish most often because things get missed. Not huge numbers of errors, but enough. I think probably maybe 20 tough-to-spot errors over the course of those revisions.

Now, over three years later, they are probably as error-free as they will ever be.

By comparison, my eight-hour fiction titles, where I've taken on more of the responsibility for ensuring the quality of the final edit, and enlisted more beta-readers, have not needed the constant re-publishing.

Of course, there will be exponentially more errors to find in 50K+ works of fiction than there are in works that are between 7.5K to 14K.

I think the best thing is this: whether it's using many eyes such as beta-readers or Write On or some other form of critique group, it *is* possible to be the "editor of final authority" on your work. A paid editor is a great asset, if you can afford it, but one paid editor, however skilled, is still just one extra set of eyes, as human as any other.

What I *will* say is this:

Regardless of what method one employs... be it self-editing, or beta-readers, or Write On, or Critique's Circle, or whatnot, or even hiring an editor?

NONE of that works if you are a writer unwilling to actually receive constructive criticism and feedback.

I know it's almost verboten to acknowledge, but although some writers have great, professional attitudes, there are also those who get offended and defensive even when you're pointing out a simple typo.

They're the ones who reject the CMoS as "an arbitrary set of rules, there are no rules, I'm an indie" and will go on forever about artistic freedom and whatnot.

There are also those who are strong on their storytelling but weak on spelling, grammar, and other blind spots and refuse to even acknowledge they need help in those areas.

So while the OP has a point that self-editing is possible, I will also point out that it's not for the bull-headed or for those who simply and honestly lack those particular skills (but might be wonderful writers with the help of those who DO have those skills).


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Craig check your messages speaking of editing and formatting.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

cinisajoy said:


> Now please point me to the nearest best seller that has errors on every page.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

I self-edit. Yes, I due.

I find those elusive little errors that hide in there post-publication when I start to record the audiobook. They really jump out at me then.


----------



## thewitt (Dec 5, 2014)

Al Stevens said:


> I self-edit. Yes, I due.
> 
> I find those elusive little errors that hide in there post-publication when I start to record the audiobook. They really jump out at me then.


I hope they due....


----------



## lmckinley (Oct 3, 2012)

I self-edit. And it shows.

My reviewers mention typos, weird changes in point of view, and so on. There are problems in my early writing that I am only beginning to see.

But I've also gotten five star reviews from a few generous souls.

When I put my first book out there, I really wanted to know if I could write a book that would work for someone who wanted to read it just as a reader. And it turns out that there are at least a few readers who were able to see past what I was doing wrong, and appreciate the things I got right. I'll likely need editing help if I'm going to move further in my writing endeavors, (although I am going to ask for James Scott Bell's book for Christmas). But for me, it has been worth it to put out a book edited by myself. I was a strong enough writer and self-editor that I could pull it off, albeit not as well as it should be done. It showed me things I needed to get to work on, and gave me the needed feedback to know that I could, in fact, write a book that people wanted to read.


----------



## pauldude000 (May 22, 2013)

Ronny K said:


> A writer writes a manuscript, then he/she revises it, and revises it, and revises it. That's just writing. Changing a sentence you've already written isn't Editing. That's just Writing, IMO.


A writer writes and revises. Then it goes to the editing stage and the writer changes a bad sentence into a good one, and also fixes all of the other snafus. That's editing. Just because the writer did the editing does not change the job description.

Concerning editing, I have tried many models.

I have farmed out work as well as also self-edited my own manuscripts. I have tried the write the entire manuscript and then edit approach, yet have come to prefer the 'make it shine as you go' method. I have found that having your manuscript as near perfect as possible at the end takes less overall time to produce a finished manuscript for the same quality, or even better in some instances. I have also found that this improves the clarity and vibrancy of the story. The technique also assists in keeping the story on track, with a better flow and tone, and also can provide new avenues for the story line, if necessary.

It works well for me.

I edit on a chapter/by/chapter basis, and those ten thousand snafus, story holes, cruddy flow problems, typos, misspellings, etc., that usually have to be weeded out later, are simply not there on the whole. When I am done writing, publishing is just a short time span away and not weeks later as I have previously experienced, and the story quality is far better.

However, to self-edit professionally, a person needs to put in the skull-sweat time to properly learn what they are doing, but this is nothing new. The same is true for any endeavor. Anyone can profess that they do something for a living, but being a professional at anything is a state of mind.


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

I'm still waiting for Cin to hit me with the bad news or good news, depending.  Love that cheesy grin emoticon. Shoot me a PM, don't want to hang out all my dirty laundry.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Hitting RipleyKing with some good news for him.  Bad news for me.  You don't owe me any money.  Your books are good.


----------



## Guest (Dec 16, 2014)

I can tell the difference between a well-edited and a poorly-edited story.

I have read poorly edited books that were edited by someone other than the author, and I have read beautifully edited books that were edited by the author themselves.

I don't really care who edits the book, I just wish more indie books were edited correctly. There are soooo many books that I think sound good but I can't suffer through the horrible editing. They still sell well, though. Want to know why? Because most READERS (who aren't writers or editors themselves) don't care 

Also, I'm afraid I can't agree that editing is like cleaning a car. PROOFREADING is like cleaning a car. Too many people think no typos = edited. Really, really, REALLY REALLY REALLY not the case. Of the hundreds of books I have checked out on this forum, I can count the ones that don't still need an editor on one hand. 

That said, my own books certainly do need more proofreaders. Things always slip by. But you can tell the difference between some slips and between errors in almost every sentence or paragraph.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

I'm reading the e-book version of Irving Wallace's "The Man." It was almost certainly scanned with OCR, and it has a lot of typos (scanos?). It's a wonderful story written in the 1960s about the first black president. Most, if not all, of those errors would have been caught with one proof-reading. Whether typed or scanned, every book should be proof read by somebody. I don't know why they didn't bother. Irving himself couldn't have done it. He died in 1990.


----------



## AisFor (Jul 24, 2014)

I've been amazed by the errors that have slipped by in some of my work - work that I've proofed several times and would have sworn was flawless (And I've worked as a professional editor and writer for a few years now). In the past, things like 'sunk' instead of 'sank' have ended up not only in the text, but in the blurb, for christsake. Luckily my partner has an eagle eye, and always reads my text after I've done my first edit.


----------



## RipleyKing (Mar 5, 2013)

> Hitting RipleyKing with some good news for him. Bad news for me. You don't owe me any money. Your books are good.


Bless you! Even if I did have something you can tell me. I've been putting myself out there for twenty plus years, so I got a very thick skin. I'm a storyteller first, writer second, and a self-taught one at that. I managed pro level with my short stories, but always seemed to miss the boat with novels, until I came here. I love it here! 

My place to be!


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

RipleyKing said:


> Bless you! Even if I did have something you can tell me. I've been putting myself out there for twenty plus years, so I got a very thick skin. I'm a storyteller first, writer second, and a self-taught one at that. I managed pro level with my short stories, but always seemed to miss the boat with novels, until I came here. I love it here!
> 
> My place to be!


If you had errors you would have gotten a pm.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Al Stevens said:


> I'm reading the e-book version of Irving Wallace's "The Man." It was almost certainly scanned with OCR, and it has a lot of typos (scanos?). It's a wonderful story written in the 1960s about the first black president. Most, if not all, of those errors would have been caught with one proof-reading. Whether typed or scanned, every book should be proof read by somebody. I don't know why they didn't bother. Irving himself couldn't have done it. He died in 1990.


That was actually quite common early in the 'kindle era'. Lots of books being scanned and uploaded with nothing more than an OCR pass. Depending on the quality of the original scan, the results could be pretty bad. It was clearly an over reliance on technology with little understanding of what was needed to make it work well. In other words: garbage in, garbage out.  (Almost literally! )


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> That was actually quite common early in the 'kindle era'. Lots of books being scanned and uploaded with nothing more than an OCR pass. Depending on the quality of the original scan, the results could be pretty bad. It was clearly an over reliance on technology with little understanding of what was needed to make it work well. In other words: garbage in, garbage out.  (Almost literally! )


Very true, and, dirty little secret? Even the big publishers were guilty of it not too long ago. (2010 or thereabouts.)

Specific example:

I bought an early copy of The Ritual Bath by Faye Kellerman several years back and it was a rather horrible OCR scan-job. (Hey, it was a 1986 book, so it was 24 years old as a book at the time.)

About a year later, they re-issued the eBook and I grabbed it off a "free day" special Amazon ran on it and was finally able to read it in comprehensible form.

(It was Book One in the Decker/Lazerus police procedural/crime series.)


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

"The Man" must have gone through one pass of proofing. I've found two instances where the reader inserted bracketed questions to the editor, and those comments didn't get deleted in the final.

BTW, OT, but I recommend this book. First published in 1964, it has parallels to today in the attitudes of many facets of society and government toward a minority president. Eerily prophetic for fifty years ago and hard to put down.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

MeganBryce said:


> Just revisiting because I am still very happy self-editing, and there are lots of examples in here of individual editing processes.


Me, too, Megan. The more I do it, the better I get at it, and the same with making covers. It takes me longer to find a stock image and decide on a font than actually making the cover.


----------

