Do Editors Still Edit?

Later this month, the guest speaker at my local Sisters in Crime chapter meeting will be an editor from Simon and Schuster. Among the things he’ll discuss will be, “Do editors edit anymore?” How do I know? Because that’s what the announcement postcard says in boldfaced, italicized, and slightly larger type.

The Sisters in Crime general discussion list recently inaugurated an offering called Mentor Monday. A wonderful idea, it features a different publishing professional (published author, editor, agent, librarian) answering list members’ questions every Monday. This week's guest, an author, was asked, “We keep hearing that editors don’t edit anymore. What has been your experience?”

Whether or not editors still edit has become a hot question the past several years. The problem is, the people posed the question usually aren’t the best ones to answer it. Writers generally go by their personal experience, which is usually with the same editor for a number of years, and editors tend to go by what they themselves do. The best person to ask would be someone who deals with a variety of editors from a variety of publishing houses.

As a freelance copyeditor, I can tell you, in no uncertain terms, that the answer to whether or not editors still edit is an unequivocal, um, yes and no. The fact is, some editors edit and some don’t. Some publishers require their editors to edit and others don’t. And among the editors who edit and the houses that encourage it, the amount of editing that’s done varies.

First let’s clarify the type of editing we’re discussing. Editors such as the guest speaker at my upcoming chapter meeting do developmental editing. Here, the editor helps the writer produce the final draft of a manuscript. The editor will point out problems with the plot and pacing and characters. He or she will recommend where material should be added to fill out descriptions or improve explanations, where text could be deleted to tighten things up, how paragraphs or sections could be shifted to increase tension or flow. These editors almost always work in-house.

Copyeditors do everything else, including copy (mechanical) editing and line (stylistic) editing. Some also do substantive (structural) editing. (For descriptions, click here.) These editors generally work on a freelance or contract basis.

Over the years, I’ve worked for every type of publisher in terms of the amount of editing expected. One full-time employer felt that once it acquired a manuscript, it had the right to totally rework it, no matter what the author wanted or how much the author objected. Another felt the writer’s words were sacred and didn’t even allow commas to be inserted without the author’s approval. Most fell in between these two extremes.

As a freelance copyeditor, I do work for a number of different publishers, a few on a regular basis. Some of these clients want me to plow in and fix everything necessary, while others want me to merely point out the problems and recommend the corrections. Again, most fall in between, but they still vary in how heavily they want me to edit and in the amount of leeway they give me.

I’ve also noticed that the quality of the manuscripts from one publisher can vary depending on who the in-house editor is. At one company, some of the editors can be superb, obviously working closely with their authors to craft near-to-perfect final drafts, while other editors there seem to barely look at their manuscripts. Needless to say, I lunge for manuscripts edited by the first kind of editor and sometimes find my schedule suddenly packed when offered a project handled by the second kind. I’ve had some manuscripts from editors like the latter that I pretty much ended up having to rewrite.

But if my experience doesn’t convince you, bring up the subject at the next gathering of published authors you attend. Guaranteed, some will complain of too much editor intrusion, others will lament the lack of editing they've received, and others will say their experiences have been just fine.