1

Many editors will have a manuscript queue, so patience once the work is booked in is key. To go a step further, I encourage my authors to work on a goal whilst waiting for their edit. This could be planning or working on a different book, or a promotional task such as building their author social-media presence, or researching publishers and agents for a submissions campaign. It is possible to book a consultation call to firm up what would be most effective here. It’s always a good feeling when the manuscript is returned and you haven’t been ‘standing still’ in the meantime.

2

Before you receive your edit, realise you may not agree with every change the editor suggests. I actually really enjoy when an author passionately stands up for a decision they’ve made. Interrogating ideas and means of expression through an edit can lead to embracing elements further (i.e. leaning in and doing more of the point in question) or making a different change so the original idea works more effectively. If something is flagged up as potentially needing attention, give it some thought – perhaps over several sessions – and if you disagree with the editorial suggestion or comment, check that your intention is coming across on the page. Some dialogue with your editor may be needed.

3

If the editor makes a specific suggestion for your narrative, this can be a prompt for the kind of change that’s needed rather than you having to be wedded to the editor’s idea. In communicating with an author or publisher, as an editor I have the choice of: change the words; outline where something isn’t working; give a specific illustration of something that could work. Where a specific suggestion assists me in communicating my thoughts, my actual intention is to prompt the writer into their own thinking. As an editor I’m never offended if my suggestion isn’t taken, as long as it has prompted the author to interrogate their text and choices. 

4

Carefully viewing the edit can flag up your writing habits and make you a better writer in the long term. It’s why I recommend even authors who simply like to ‘accept all’ editorial changes or who request a ‘clean copy’ of the manuscript without changes tracked take time to digest their edit – and come back to me with any questions.

5

Remember, the editor’s aim is to work with you to make your manuscript as strong as possible. All manuscripts will have areas for development, so do expect plenty of editorial suggestion and comment, and don’t feel deflated if there is a further stage of work indicated. I do my best to flag up the areas that are working well, in addition to excellent or memorable phrasing, but sections with no comment or edits can also be considered strong.

Over the twenty-plus years I’ve been working as an editor, a number of writers have confessed to me their hope that the edit will find their work to be exceptional, with only a very few comments and edits needed. I remind them that even writers with many years of experience will go through a rigorous editing process. I think of the editing process as akin to interrogating a text, to examining a prototype from all angles to ensure it is ‘sound’.

6

Developing a manuscript works best in stages. Whilst I aim to flag up as much as I can and give as much concrete suggestion as possible on each read or ‘editing pass’, different issues will come to the foreground in each draft, and as the manuscript becomes ‘cleaner’ an editor can focus on different matters. In a traditional publishing house, manuscripts go through multiple rounds of edits and proofreading to achieve the polished version that is published.

When I work on a full book-production package, the manuscript is usually edited before typesetting and again after typesetting, with at least one round of proofreading to follow. Once the book is in typeset form, it can be viewed differently by both author and editor, and the form itself suggests further amendment. For example, aiming to avoid a line or two running on to an otherwise blank page at the end of a chapter can encourage further tightening of prose, or an author may find it easier to ‘kill a darling’ (favoured section) when viewing what is close to the final product. Again, viewing the first printed proof will often inspire a round of changes – though hopefully the number of amendments is getting fewer at each stage.