Poking yourself in the other eyes

J.S. wrote about the question of unpublished writers using an editor before submitting their novels.

"I'm on an e-mail list for romance writers where we got into a discussion about the value of hiring an editor before a sale is made. Sadly, this dissolved into an US vs. THEM discussion. Most of the writers on the list seemed to be against hiring an editor prior to making a sale, arguing that the writer's voice would be changed, and the story unrecognizable in the end.

"I'm curious about your perspective on unpublished writers using editors to improve their work. Personally, I say anything that makes my writing better, I'm willing to try and learn for myself. Once I see suggestions you make -- even on other writers' work -- I try to apply them myself with varying degrees of success. Many of the anti-editor people argued about the money side, that a free critique partner would offer much more reasonable advice. I'm not so sure. Not in my limited experience. People are too worried about hurting each other's feelings to truly say what they mean.

"Currently, I'm working with a published mentor who worked in NY for many years under many different agents and editors as both a writer and a reader. She does NOT pull any punches -- I've got the bumps on my head to prove it. Part of our plan is to learn to read our work with a critical eye, to self edit, to read our work as an editor might. But a lot of people do not have this opportunity. A lot of writers might not be able to afford a full editor review, either. That's why I think your blog is so valuable."

Thanks, J.S. First, sounds to me like you're very lucky to have a mentor with those qualifications -- she should be expert "other eyes."

I have to disagree strenuously with the naysayers on your list, and not because I do editing. I'm also a writer, and I KNOW how valuable expert other eyes are to my work. I believe they have made the difference between my finding an agent and not, and between offering a publishable manuscript versus the sad alternative.

Your compatriots are wise to be wary of losing their voice to an editor's hand…but only an incompetent editor would, in my opinion, do that to a manuscript. I've worked with many other writers in critique groups who have a tendency to want to see things said they way they would say them, and I've learned to ignore that. Another problem with "amateur" critiquers is the one you point out -- pulling punches.

Another problem is that the advice is not based on heavy study and experience -- I know one writer who pulled out of a critique group and stopped writing for a year because he found himself trying to shape his narrative to meet the prejudices of his group members.

There are editors who labor to respect a writer's voice -- I'm one of them, and I think the mini-edits on FtQ are proof enough. In fact, a good editor will help a writer clear away the litter that muffles their voice and let the true flavor come through as strongly as possible. Whether or not that voice is marketable is another question entirely. My job is to make your writing as good as it can be, not to make your writing read as if it were mine.

Allow me to quote myself on this subject -- I did a post early on that was sparked by Anne Rice's proud (and foolish) refusal to allow an editor to touch her work. Her attitude and a close look at my keyboard led me to this…

The amount of grunge that had built up on my 4-year-old keyboard finally flagged my attention. Dingy gray soiled the sides of the keys, between the keys, and even the tops. Sound familiar?

That grunge, it occurs to me, is like the congenital flaws you can find in any novelist's work (including, dang it, mine). Grunge is missteps a writer takes -- or steps he fails to take -- that go unnoticed and accumulate, dimming and diminishing the narrative.

I got a bottle of cleaner and a paper towel, sprayed, and wiped. Back-lit as the keyboard was by my monitor and a lamp at one end of my desk, it looked fine. This effort, I later learned, was the equivalent of self-editing. I got the obvious stuff, but missed deeper grime because I couldn't see it. Not enough light from the right angle.

Later, going to open Stein on Writing for a refresher course, I found that my lighting was terrible for reading because it came at me from the front. So I positioned a desk lamp for backlight. Which cast a front light on the keyboard. It revealed that my keyboard fairly dripped with grunge I'd missed.

Not only did it cover the sides of the keys, some scum still discolored their tops. Nasty. I went to work with cotton swabs, cleaner and a fresh paper towel, performed the equivalent of a rewrite after a professional edit, and now write this on a clean keyboard. That desk lamp was like an editor's mind, revealing unseen grunge that gums up and weakens narrative.

I've learned (resentfully, because the learning curve seems to have no end) that I need independent, story-smart eyes to shine a revealing light on my fiction from a fresh angle. Generally, my stories are seen as having involving plots, excellent pace, vivid action, and strong writing…plus big fat voids where I have not done enough with character motivation or revealed enough about characters to make them emotionally involving. It's not that I can't do those things, but I just fail to see that some wavelengths are missing. My deep inner knowledge of characters fills in the missing parts of the spectrum, backlighting the narrative so that I cannot perceive the lacks…the weaknesses…the grunge.

In my mini-edits on FtQ I've received samples from both published and unpublished authors, and I guarantee you that all were dimmed by grunge, some far more severely than others.

Every novelist owes it to herself and to readers to find other eyes, knowing ones that can see the grunge. Unless you're very lucky in whom you know, that probably means an independent editor. Yes, an editor costs, but what is the cost of backs being turned on your writing? What is the cost of ruining your one shot at snaring an agent or editor? At the least, you can check out editors who will consider doing a free critique of a sample…but ONLY if you are willing to follow up with an order for an edit if you are convinced you need one. In my opinion, to submit to agents or editors without an editorial review is, for the huge majority of beginning novelists, a huge mistake.

As for critique groups and others in your circle you can ask for feedback, here's what one of my clients wrote after my edit of a short story.

"I was using friends as editors, all of them people with some knowledge of storytelling -- an actress, a business magazine editor, an amateur writer and an English teacher. I thought that would cover the spectrum of problems I might create in my story.

"I did get good comments, but the criticism was not very constructive. All my friends felt there was 'something missing,' or 'something is not working.' While I knew they were right, I didn't know exactly what was bothering us."

So I say to J.S.'s friends, I don't believe your work can reach its potential, or your true voice be loud and clear, without independent, expert other eyes. Most of those eyes belong to editors. Yes, you can learn to be a good self-editor -- I did -- but even so THERE WILL BE FLAWS that you, the author, simply cannot see. So what's smart? Grope in the dark? Or turn on a light?

For what it's worth.

RR

Free edit in exchange for posting permission. You send a sample that you have questions about and of which you'd like an edit. I won't post it without your permission.

Tip Jar: visitors have asked for a way to lay a dime or two on me and, I'll confess, it would be helpful. So if you want to chip in, click here. And many thanks.

© 2005 Ray Rhamey