The Editor/Author relationship....

If you go way back to my first post I explained in great detail the scientific process I followed in order to whittle down the hundreds of potential proofreaders/editors to find the one that I was going to work with.

To save time, here it is
"However, in the interests of a scientific experiment (or possibly because I knew no better, you decide) I closed my eye's and stuck my finger on the screen, proofreader selected! This structured and precise selection process led to Proofreadnz, I did follow up with a phone call to my newly appointed professional, so it wasn't complete fluke!."

OK, maybe not so scientific, and I know I got lucky, it could of been a disaster. But at that time I knew no better.

I've read many blog posts regarding bad experiences with Editors, mainly around poor quality editing, spelling, sentence or paragraph construction, even some that re-write the Authors words. And the unsuspecting Indie Author just accepts it, again because they know no better.

I don't know what the 'big names' do, say or charge but here's the thing, the relationship between the Author and the Editor is two way and requires clear boundaries. I'm hoping to reproduce a list of 10 things each should do, I'm just waiting on permission from the author of those list to print them on this blog, so hopefully they will come soon, but it set me thinking. What IS the relationship?

As the Author of my book, the content belongs to me, it's is my story; An editors job is to take your words and help to ensure they reflect a professionally written masterpiece. But that doesn't mean an Author can throw together tens of thousands of words, without a hint of sensible storyline or structure and pass to the Editor and say 'fix it'.

Judi and I had a number of phone call's before she received the first section of Russian Redemption, she guided me to the point where she could comfortably take over the section and apply her magic. To give you an idea, by the time it arrived on her e-mail I had written the 10,000 - 12,000 words, rewritten segments, added or subtracted large sections that (during a re-read) just hadn't sat right with me, and tweaked little errors that had been the result of typing too fast. MS Word is a great program for writing a manuscript as it flag's spelling & grammar errors but it's not infallible, especially when writing in the manner that I do. I'd probably re-read those 10,000  - 12,000 words at least eight or nine times, making many alterations and only then would I send it across to Judi. The Editor is the expert, they don't want to waste their time (time that you're paying for!) correcting silly little errors that a ten year old can see so it is important to invest your own time to get it to a standard that means you get the best value for your money. And they, the Editor, will appreciate the effort.

It's important that both the Author and the Editor have an understanding of time scales. As I may have mentioned on one or two occasions, I am not the worlds most patient person. I had no understanding of the size of the task or the methodology of the 'Editor/Proofreader' so once I'd sent the 10,000 - 12,000 words across I saw no reason why I couldn't have the polished version back within a week - WRONG. With a little understanding of just how much work is involved, and the standard methods used by a proofreader/editor you'll see just how unreasonable that was. Judi reads sections, forwards and backwards, not just once, and of course, I'm not her only client. Actually, I think it would be good to get Judi to write a piece for this blog to give everyone an idea of exactly what her process is - watch this space.

Anyway, back to the topic, I think it is important to have that level of respect for your publisher (and vice versa) where time scales can be agreed and worked towards, but it is also important to have the relationship and communication so that each party can be as flexible as needs be. Remember, this is YOUR book, if you rush your proofreader/publisher it will only impact the finished article, and probably not in a good way.

That's also a really important point - communication. If (and it's a big IF) your publisher 'gets' you, the job is a whole lot easier. In my case Judi does 'get' me. She understands what I'm writing and has identified my 'style' of writing, which means any suggested changes are in that same style. Note the word 'suggested'. An editor should NOT change a single word of your manuscript without your explicit instruction. They are there to advise, to recommend, but at the same time you've employed them to do a job, you've employed their expertise - it may be foolish to ignore their suggestions. We often spent hours on the phone discussing the finer detail of specific sections just to make sure we'd both got it right. If we couldn't communicate at that level I think I/we could of had a problem.

One of the many benefits of having a 'smaller' publisher/proofreader is that they also become emotionally invested in your book, they can't help it, and this is a good thing. Judi is very much about producing the best quality publication as far as construction, grammar, spelling etc because she is putting her Company's name to it, publicly. As an Indie Author, I want to put the very best novel in the public domain that I can, this is where the 'partnership' really works and is mutually beneficial. It would also be fair to say that she made recommendations around parts of the storyline, and with her years of experience I would of been remiss not to have listened.

Russian Redemption is my first novel and I honestly believe I could not have had a better proof reader/ Editor or friend to guide me through the process. I have little doubt that it will be a huge success on an international level just as soon as it gets 'discovered'. And whoever does 'discover' it will discover a well produced and edited novel, a well written story line, strong characters and gripping pace. That is what happens when Editor/Proofreader and Author work together.

See ya soon...

.