Emily De Silva

Editing, like writing, is an art. By carefully examining a manuscript's details, stylistic design, and structural elements, we can either miraculously aid a writer in their journey to publication or detrimentally harm their work and aspirations.

 

Good editing is not merely about rereading text and picking at errors and grammatical typos; it's a way of viewing a document from different angles, and therefore, it's different depending on what a manuscript needs. Some will only require a detailed look for spelling, grammar, and other mechanical errors while others will require more of an in-depth view of the content within. It's more than simply following a list of rules and guidelines and depends heavily on what the author's goals are and how they want the recipient of the writing to respond. This being said, there are a few specific stages of editing that are required for all manuscripts; whether or not a writer will complete any one of these stages themselves or bring an editor on board is up to them to decide.

​

1. Developmental or structural editing

2. Line or stylistic editing

3. Copy editing

​

In this order, editors can develop a manuscript to a higher level by dealing with much more pressing issues first.​

​

Developmental editing, being big-picture work, is where editors must focus on structure, organization, plot, conflict, and whether the manuscript makes sense as a whole. For works of fiction, chapters should be viewed in service to the whole narrative. Each chapter must be carefully reviewed for accomplishment. To do so, it's wise for an editor to hold a mindset in which they're constantly asking questions such as: What is being accomplished in each chapter? Do the characters grow in any way? How does this chapter or section add value to the overall arc of the story? If the answer is nothing, very little, or in no way at all, then it's an editor's job to make note of it and bring resolutions to the author's attention. It's during this stage that plot holes—substantial details missing from the story—are found most easily and major changes are made so the manuscript is coherent and flows well on a much grander scale.

​

Line editing, on the other hand, should often come after substantial revisions are made. It requires looking at a manuscript "line by line," ensuring the sentence structure stays consistent and the manuscript is clear and coherent on a narrower level. It involves analyzing each sentence individually, as it comes. Editors are obligated to focus on language, word choice, and flow, and remove repetition and redundancy. However, they must also be on the hunt for plagiarism and AI-generated content  by being consistently conscious of the tone and style the text is written in. Dramatic changes in either is often a sign that something is amiss, and with AI technology growing in our modern world today, it's essential that both editors and writers familize themselves with AI-generated writing and the effect AI tools have on writers' creativity.

​

Copy editing, the final stage, should only be done when all larger issues are resolved, as this is when editors ensure the material meets the author's and target audience's expectations, finalizing the draft for its intented use. It requires a keen eye for detail and should focus on nitty-gritty errors, such as spelling, grammar, syntax, and writing mechanics. I have personally yet to see a piece of writing that's devoid of any of such errors, which is completely natural. Most of the general population, I believe, tends to think that those who are characteristically “good at writing” are good at this—copy editing—but this is simply not necessarily the case. Copy errors are simply part of the writing process. No matter what writers do, it's impossible to avoid them, which is why it's important to self-edit one's own work before sending it to a professional editor. This is an example of why writers should have some knowledge about how to edit and why editors should have a general knowledge of a writer's writing process—because it's essential we understand each other's areas of focus and key concern in order to create the best book possible.

​

Of course, editing isn't always quite so linear.​ As a whole, it can be an irregular process. While it's true that editors should aim to complete a developmental edit before a stylistic one, it isn't always this simple. On some occasions, a copy edit may lead to a developmental edit—and vice versa if an editor is bad at their job. But this is okay. It's part of the writing process.

​​

An editor's job is not to simply correct what's wrong, but to use what's there and make it better. Enhance it. Unified with the author and their goals and aspirations, editors are to create the best manuscript they can by offering suggestions, not by changing anything directly. Editors should not be working alone because it is not a solo proposition. To be ethical in our work, we must consider the author's vision before our own. It is their work after all. We are only to be a helpful guide until publication; that is all.

 

Moreover, an editor must be willing to work with writers—someone willing to put their work on display for criticism—and vice versa. Writers, too, must then learn to work with editors and let their work be criticized, but they mustn't let us criticize so much as to destroy the goals they want the manuscript to achieve. It's a two-way street.​ It's for this reason that I believe editors should include three crucial steps when suggesting a change. They are as follows:

​

1. Inform the writer what you’re picking out that isn’t working well.

2. Let them know why it isn’t working well.

3. Offer them options for how they can make it better, ideally two or three.

​​

By following these steps, an editor is able to provide the most optimal feedback and resolutions to any piece of writing, be it an email, a letter, a business plan, a poem, or a fully-fledged novel. An editor's job is not to simply correct and criticize or demean the author; it is offer careful and considerate comments and suggestions, and especially options.

​

Editing is a tricky business. It's not always easy to get it right. It takes time, practice, dedication to the craft, and devotion to the writer's visions. It requires knowing what readers will be looking for and knowing how to ensure the manuscript consistently meets the author's expectations. It's learning to do all this simultaneously without compromising one or the other. It's knowing what the manuscript already has and what it is lacking, and therefore, filling those blanks in.​ Above all, it's about collaboration and communication.

​

My greatest piece of advice I can give to anybody aspiring to be a professional editor in this industry is to practice and apply the steps above on your own work, as if you were reading it for the first time. Take a 6-week break from the project if necessary, or if you must, call upon a friend to hand you something new. Review your work in the mindset of its ideal reader. What might their first impressions be? Go from there.

 

Every writer needs a second set of eyes; that's where the art of editing comes in. Whether it's self-editing through the eyes of the reader or seeking external assistance from an already qualified source, it can be an exhaustive process—and sometimes may require a total rewrite of your work—but it's important to not get discouraged, as anything that's worth publishing is worth publishing coherently and at its best.