The Stages of Editing

When I tell people that I'm a freelance editor, it's quite common for people to assume that I spend my days just looking at spelling, punctuation, and grammar. I don't get this reaction from just the general public either. Many writers, especially new writers, also make this assumption. However, editing is so much more.

Editing falls into three main categories:

developmental, which encompasses the rewriting process and critiques;
copyediting, with the line-edits and of course famous punctuation-and-grammar concept;
and proofreading, which occurs after a manuscript is typeset for publication, looking for any errors that were either missed or introduced during the typesetting process.

Each stage is necessary for the production of a publishable book.

The initial drafting of a story is a solitary practice. However, during the different editing phases, it's vital for every writer to seek out those extra sets of eyes to provide objective input. The who and the when will depend entirely on what stage your manuscript is at.

The stages of editing are the same for both traditional and self-publication, it's just the players that may change.

The Spectrum of Genre

Whenever I meet a writer for the first time, the conversation often turns to what genre we read and write. Will we be able to find some common ground from which we can build a connection — other than the fact that we're both writers?

When I first started out on my editing career, I would encounter the odd person who insisted that they didn't write a genre. They wrote fiction. To this, I would nod and smile — and gauge whether they would be receptive to a quick education. But now, the writers I encounter seem to understand that fiction is marketed based on genre. It is important for a writer to understand the ins and outs of their specific genre and subgenre. Get it wrong, and the fans of those subgenres will flay you alive.

In today's post, we going to take a quick look at the spectrum of genre.

The Traditional 3-Act Structure: Part 3

There is a natural instinct that exists among most writers about where to put the tension beats in, where things need to change, when the reader needs a break from all the action. That is because most writers read a lot, or watch a lot of movies, or... Well, we just spend a lot of time in a fictional world somewhere. When we do that, we do start to see the patterns, even if we don't understand the formula being applied to those stories.

The traditional 3-act structure is just one of countless number of models out there on story structure. Over the past few posts, we have been breaking down the traditional 3-act structure into the nitty-gritty, getting to the root of why it works the way it does.

In Part 1 of this series, we examined the elements of act 1, including the inciting event and the first transition point, what I called the first point of No-Return. In Part 2, we looked at the first half of act 2, heading into the midpoint, and we discussed what is meant by the A-story and the B-story.

In this, the final installment of this series, we're going to look at the final transition point for the manuscript and what the working components go into act 3.

The Traditional 3-Act Structure: Part 2

Much of what a writer does when crafting a story is based on instinct, weaving in the rise and fall of action. The same can be said about a developmental editor. Every story is different, so there is no strict formula that can be applied.

Tools like the traditional 3-act structure are only diagnostic tools, designed to help us understand why something might not be working.

In the first post of this 3-Act Structure series, we introduced the importance of this structure as a whole, and began breaking it down. We looked at the first act (The Setup) and the first point of No-Return. Today, let's get into the nitty-gritty of Act 2.

The Traditional 3-Act Structure: Part 1

Most writers have a natural instinct when it comes to story structure and plot. We do so much reading, or we see so many movies, that understanding pacing is just part of our makeup. Even new writers, still learning their craft, have this instinct.

We know that if we have action scene after action scene, eventually we need to have a calm scene that gives us the chance to breathe. We know that there needs to be those moments of reflection, looking at what has happened in the past, but if we spend too much time dwelling on the past, that explosion will be needed to get things going again. And there will also be those moments when a character decides to risk all and just go for it—damned the consequences.

As writers, we follow a story structure with the instinct of knowing where the rise and fall in the action needs to be. However, when something is off in the pacing of a story, that's when all the discussions come out about one of countless number of models for story structure and the analytical tools associated with it.

As a developmental editor, it is my job to look at story structure and pacing from the macro and micro levels. If pacing is off, for whatever reason, I delve into the mechanics of a manuscript and tear that structure apart to find out why things just don't work. Much of what I do on this particular front is instinct, simply because every single story is different. However, there are some commonalities within the beats of a story, which has given rise to models like the traditional 3-act structure.

It's time to start dissecting the mechanics of some of these models, just so you, as a writer, can see why editors use them so often within our work.

Critique Partner Dating

Working with critique partners and beta readers is an important part of the editing process. These are people who are looking at your manuscripts when you have become too close to them and help you identify the weak areas. There are differences between critique partners and beta readers, each having a different focus and coming in a different stages of editing.

Your critique partners tend to be involved during the early stages of editing, looking at a story's development. As such, their purpose it to help you identify weak areas of your manuscript, where the writing itself needs to develop or you need to look more into the nitty-gritty of your subject matter.

A beta reader, on the other hand, looks at the full manuscript and is there to provide you with those reader reactions. You can even employ a special breed of beta reader known as a sensitivity reader, who is one who focuses on the way in which you handled the subject matter.

Understanding what these two different types of readers do is one thing. Finding them is something entirely different.

Handling Feedback

Is First Person Really More Intimate?

Some time ago, a writing buddy of mine received a “Revise and Resubmit” (R&R) on her crime novel, with an attached editorial note stating that the editor thought it would work better in first person.

For a moment, I want to reflect on the simple fact that she got an R&R. People, this is an awesome thing for a writer to get.

It's not a rejection.
The acquisition editor saw something in your story and writing that has great potential, but they felt the manuscript wasn't quite ready to take before the powers that be who issue and sign contracts. The editor is giving the writer another chance.

If you get an R&R, celebrate! Then take the time to look over the editorial notes and seriously consider their merits.

Okay, so after we finished celebrating the fact she got an R&R, she told a group of fellow writers about the editor wanting the manuscript in first person. There were roughly ten of us around the table that day, and several piped up quickly to say, "first-person narratives were more intimate." There I was, sitting on the other side of the table, biting my tongue. The others in the room were so adamant about their view, and nothing I could say would change their point of view. More importantly, my writing buddy agreed with them.

A Synopsis is NOT a Blurb

Over the past few weeks, I’ve been helping writing buddies prepare submissions for various writing contests. From PitchWars through to RWNZ’s Great Beginning, each of these contest required a synopsis as part of the submission packet. PitchWars required a query letter too. However, there was one thing that seemed to be a constant theme: there was confusion about the difference between a synopsis and a blurb.

To put it simply, a blurb is the short teaser that snags the interest of a reader, enticing them to read more. This is what is typically used on the back cover of a printed book. It’s a blurb that one will find in a query letter.

A synopsis is the spoiler alert, containing ALL plot points from the main thread of the story from start to finish, including the ending. It’s an editing tool that the public will never see unless you let them.

Let’s break this down a bit further.
Read More→

Show the story. Tell the ride through the countryside.

Show the emotions. Show the setting. Show the complexities of your mind. Show this. Show that.

Oh, before I forget, tell that ride through the countryside. Tell that little backstory through dialogue. Tell the oral history.

When does one use tell? Should I always show? At what point is it too much show and not enough tell?

Show. Show. Show. Tell. Tell. Tell. It can seriously do your head in.

Understanding the difference between the two is one thing. Striking a balance between them to keep your reader engaged is another. For the moment, let's focus on the first issue.