Change, Compromise, Dig Your Heels In: Dealing with the Editorial Report
By Juliet Marillier | April 7, 2016 |
I’ve just this week finished revising the manuscript for my latest novel, DEN OF WOLVES, third book in the BLACKTHORN & GRIM series. I’ve already spent many months writing the book and doing my own in-depth revisions. The ms then went to my two publishers, one in the US and one in Australia, for a structural edit, and I was sent a detailed report compiled by my wonderful Australian editor from the two sets of notes. Along with this report came an annotated version of my manuscript. The process is similar with most publishing houses.
This time around the report ran to only six pages, which must make it the shortest I’ve had in 20 novels. That doesn’t mean the queries were all easy to address – editorial notes can make the most confident writer tear her hair out, invent new curses, overdose on caffeine, and generally wallow in self-doubt. But it does get easier the more you have to do it, and if you’re lucky enough to work with the same editor over several books, you learn how to communicate with both honesty and tact, and how to work together in the interests of making this the best book it can be.
Note, I’m not talking about a copy edit / line edit, where spelling, grammar, syntax and logic are checked – that is in most cases a separate operation that happens later, though my Australian editor now combines the two. The red pen and stack of manuscript pages are gone – it’s a digital process these days. The structural edit is the major edit, where weaknesses and inconsistencies in plot, setting, character or pacing are addressed. For DEN OF WOLVES, for instance, the editor picked up an apparent glitch in the passage of time. The novel has four point of view characters who take chapters in turn, and who are often separated for longish periods. I thought I had been so careful about what day it was, what time it was, and who was where, but I seem to have missed a day. Next time I’ll ditch the sticky notes and use a spreadsheet!
There are three ways you can go with an editorial suggestion: change, compromise, or refuse to budge. Note, your editor’s structural report is not the same thing as feedback from a Beta reader. You should listen to your Betas, especially if several are in agreement on a certain point. But it’s entirely your choice whether to follow their suggestions or not. With a professional editor, especially an editor who’s being paid by your publisher to do the job, refusing to do anything they suggest may just possibly lead to your book not being published, as there’s most likely a clause in your contract that says something about your delivering the manuscript in an acceptable form by a certain date. That clause gives the publisher the right to refuse publication if they consider the final revised ms not up to scratch, or if it’s not submitted on time. Usually it doesn’t get that far, as the various parties can work together to get a satisfactory manuscript ready on time. So let’s talk about how we do that, faced with a challenging editorial report.
Change: A editorial suggestion may make perfect sense to you – it may be obvious that it improves the flow, ratchets up the tension, makes a character’s decisions more consistent or corrects something misleading. There may be an implied meaning in what you have written that you haven’t realised is there; that implied meaning may be not at all what you intended (this has happened to me in the past, and I was deeply grateful to have it pointed out in time.) You’ll happily make those changes and feel grateful for your editor’s insight.
Compromise: Your editor may make suggestions you’re not sure about. Maybe you agree that there’s a problem, but you don’t like the solution she’s suggested. For me, these often have to do with the withholding of information. I tackled a mystery series because I knew it would be a particular challenge for me. One of the comments in this editorial report was that readers would guess the answer to a critical question far too early in the book. There was no way to fix this completely without weakening other critical elements of the story. I made some changes, but it probably only delayed the inevitable by 50 pages or so. It doesn’t bother me very much if readers guess the truth too early. I made a note for the editor: the mystery lies not in the WHAT but in the HOW.
Dig Your Heels In: Sometimes the editor makes a suggestion the author really hates. It feels quite wrong for the story, the character, or the world. That didn’t happen with DEN OF WOLVES but it has happened for me before, with the manuscript my then editor described to me by phone as ‘disappointing.’ That moment (labelled forever in my mind as ‘how not to give an author bad news’) has stayed with me through the later success of the book in question and of many others after it. In that instance, I refused to make many of the recommended changes, including some very major ones. However, I accepted that there were some flaws, did a major rewrite and recognised that the book was stronger as a result. Proving, I think, that both writer and editor got some things wrong and some things right.
When you’re in the depths of the structural report, don’t lose sight of the fact that this is your book. Your plot. Your characters. Your story. Do listen to your editor’s wise advice, but if you know in your heart of hearts that a particular revision is just wrong, and that no compromise is possible, explain this to your editor. Don’t justify it with a gush of emotion, back it up with sound arguments.
My revised manuscript is back with the publisher now, being checked over yet again. Rather than sit around biting my nails and hoping it is OK, I’m doing what I always advise others to do, and getting on with the next project.
How do you feel about edits? Love them, loathe them, roll up your sleeves and get on with them? Best and worst experiences?
Image © Sue Harper | Dreamstime.com
Juliet Marillier has written twenty-four novels for adults and young adults and two collections of short fiction. Her works of historical fantasy have been published around the world and have won numerous awards. Juliet’s most recent series was Warrior Bards, of which the third and final book, A Song of Flight, was published in 2021. Her collection of reimagined fairy tales, Mother Thorn and Other Tales of Courage and Kindness, had its trade release in 2022. Mother Thorn is illustrated by Kathleen Jennings and published by Serenity Press.
Juliet is currently working on a two-book fantasy series. The first book in this duology, The Amber Owl, will be published by New Dawn in February 2025.
When not writing, Juliet looks after a small crew of rescue dogs.
Thanks for a great post, Juliet. I have not had to work with a publisher yet, but have hired an editor and am now in the process of editing my middle grade ms for an agent who is interested (YES!).
But nearly 20 years of writing, critiquing, and submitting has done wonders to break down my barrier of pride (not sure pride is the issue with women, it’s always the issue with men). If I’d sold my first book way back when, I probably would have punched holes in the walls after getting editorial notes back from the publisher. Today, I’m a little more realistic and, hopefully, the walls won’t require fresh drywall.
We complain about the long process of getting published. But I believe it’s necessary. We not only improve our craft during that journey, but we learn that ours is not a solo journey. We learn that, once we release our novels to the world, we’ve done just that. Released them. And we learn to appreciate all those who help us along the way.
Including folks like you who take the time to pass on what you’ve learned. Thank you so much again.
Best of luck with book 3!
Well said, Ron! The hole-punching response does lessen with time, as a relationship of trust develops between writer and editor. Also, as we grow and mature as writers, perhaps our editors have fewer criticisms of our work?
I know how fortunate I am to have had the same editors for long periods of time, so we could build up that good working relationship.
Good luck with the agent!
Hey, Juliet,
Enlightening article of what the future (hopefully) holds for me. I did have a question or two, though.
Okay…I take it you have an agent, but it seems like you are working directly with the publisher with your edits. I thought it had to go through your agent, who acted as the liaison between you and the publisher, and that the publisher doesn’t get the ms until it’s already pristine. I was under the impression that all the edits — structural (I’ve always called it developmental), then line and copy edits — were done beforehand by your “team,” which includes your paid editors, betas, and agent. I understand the publisher might have some suggestions that you can use, but isn’t it pretty much a done deal by the time it gets to them?
Oh, and I can’t wait until our truth-gathering walk at the UnCon! Truly looking forward to that.
**** Did you read that, folks? Juliet is going to lead a session at the UnCon. So if you’re hemming and hawing about signing up, there’s a delicious cherry on top of the sundae to entice you.
Mike, the agents who are part of the WU community may have comments to make on this. It’s my understanding that some agents are very hands-on with the development of the manuscript and the editing once it’s complete. Perhaps something similar to what you set out.
Other agents are far less hands-on with the artistic side, My agent handles the contracts, the deals, the business decisions, but does not take a major part in the artistic development of the manuscript. He sees my proposal for a new project and OKs it, or suggests changes. Then he will show it to editors and secure a deal if he can.
Because I’m a fairly well established writer with a good track record, usually my agent can secure a contract on the basis of the proposal, ie while I’m still writing the book. Note, I never hire an editor myself, my agent does not hire one for me, and I make almost no use of beta readers. When the ms is completed to my satisfaction it goes to the publisher, and the process I’ve described in this post rolls out. So the only editor I deal with is the one who works for the publisher. My agent reads the completed manuscript, of course, but I can’t think of any instance when he requested any changes before sending it on to the publisher.
It feels to me as if the ‘team’ kicks in at the point where the ms reaches the publisher. Though of course my agent, my foreign rights agent and I are a sort of team too.
Thanks for clearing that up! :D
In my experience, my agent (we haven’t, sadly, gotten to the publisher part yet) reads and sends feedback on my manuscript, and the process between us is much the same as what Juliet describes here with her editor: I agree, disagree, or we land somewhere in between, and I make edits.
The important thing in it is the communication. She explains to me why she feels this, that or the other thing should be changed. I communicate to her and say, “Here’s why I’m digging in my heels on this.” Knowing why and being able to explain why you’re changing/not changing something is, I think, the key to all this.
To this point, we haven’t had irreconcilable differences over anything.
I don’t have an agent yet, but have worked with another author who has provided numerous editorial letters. Your 3 points of how to respond to these letters was right on target. Mostly I’ve learned to swallow my pride and learn what was wrong with my ms. But every once in awhile I’ve dug my heels in on what I wanted to save. Thanks for the post.
You’re welcome, Carol, and good luck with the agent search! Your process with the other author sounds valuable, great training in remaining focused through the emotional process of receiving critique.
When I read a post like this, I think, this is why it SHOULD take a bit of time before a writer gets an agent or publisher – we have to be ready and practiced for digging in with the big revisions and changes to our story (mostly – I know there are some occasion where little is changed). When I look at the “Dig Your Heels”, I know that this is where I could struggle – but I really like the point you make about backing up those heels with evidence rather than emotion.
I had an agent who was not super hands on and while she would know what needs to change, she was not very specific in how – ie: she was not an editorial agent (which is not a criticism, but was useful to me to learn) and so it took me awhile to figure out (as in, multiple tries) the way to make the changes so that she would say, “yes, this is what I mean”.
Is your editor more specific in the suggestions?
With my current editor(s) I have asked them not only to tell me what needs changing/improving but to make concrete suggestions on how I might do it, where possible. I don’t always follow those suggestions but they are really useful for helping me get the revisions done more quickly (a good thing as I am always working to deadlines.) That sort of cooperation comes from a longish working association.
What a fascinating and timely post. My first agented novel is out on submission. After signing with my agent, she suggested various changes and I wound up writing a new beginning and adding 12,000 new words to bulk up one of the main characters’ story lines. I have to say I learned a lot from that experience and the book is definitely so much stronger.
If the same thing happens with an acquisitions editor, I will dig in and do whatever is necessary. But it is nerve-wracking. I’m not sure I’d have the confidence to dig my heels in on anything. Perhaps that kind of confidence only comes with experience.
For most writers facing their first edit from an acquisitions editor, I’m sure that is correct, Leslie. With my first couple of published books I was just like that, afraid to stand up for myself, and I ended up building in a couple of stupid errors as a result. We learn by experience.
Juliet, thank you for describing this process in such detail, especially the fact that you’ve built up trust with your team over time. I’ve been working with one editor now for over a year and that trust has become a major factor in how I respond to feedback. When she tells me that a scene or chapter needs to change or go away, I may feel pukey for a while. But I trust her instincts because I know she gets what I’m after. I also feel at ease arguing for what I disagree with. That trust has taken time to develop, and has made all the difference in how I react to edits. Still, I think that first jolt of “oh, no!!” will never go away, and hearing this from you is enormously comforting, so thank you!!
You’re welcome! Yes, I bet I once would have thought a 6 page editorial report was enormous and hurtful, where now I am delighted that it’s so short and relatively light. And I don’t get those feelings of nausea and fury these days. Mind you, that’s 20 books on!
I compair working with an editor to going to a day spa. Some of the tweaking may hurt but in the end everything looks so much better.
Worse experience: Years ago, I worked with an author/editor. She said my metaphor didn’t work in my manuscript but fit nicely in hers. Could she have it? I was flattered and quickly said yes. Now I see how naive I was.
Ouch! I hope you never did that again.
Love the day spa analogy.
Such a timely post as I wait (bite my nails) for my editor to get back to me. Then I can really get busy on making it the best. I’ve been very blessed with wonderful editors — they edited with a light touch, preserving my voice, and manage to help clarify muddy waters. Only once have I had to stick to my guns because I just *knew* in my gut that the true story would be better than the fictionalized one and I’m so glad my editor eventually agreed. Another time, I couldn’t for the life of me write an unbiased article, so we eventually settled upon a sidebar about the ethics of the topic. But mostly, I am grateful for my editors who help me to say what I want to say more clearly. But until I get that first letter, I’m always nervous.
Good editors are worth their weight in gold. Good luck with your revisions!
I am a self-published/hybrid author, and I’ve always sent my finished manuscript to at least one beta reader before I send to a designated editor. When I’m involved in a workshop, the manuscript will have more critique comments on it.
I have always hired an editor, and I’ve discovered I like the structural focus the best (of course you need all if possible). My latest experience was taking 12 typed pages of edits and trying to re-work the book. Three chapters were completely cut while new parts had to be written in and original work cut, tweaked, smoothed in/out, and created. It was a challenge, but the story is so much better for it. I took the advice of beta and editor.
I decided to cut the chapters first from the document, and then I cut the parts that the beta suggested needed cutting. From that point, I worked on the story from there while keeping in mind the general issues that needed to be addressed.
Challenging and rewarding simultaneously, I’ll say!
It’s great to hear from someone who enjoys the revision experience! Your approach sounds disciplined – the only good way, really, to tackle a major rewrite.
My last book-length edit was a wonderful experience, one of my creative favorites. It took all summer, but I woke up each morning anxious to get started, and I worked at it straight through, every day, until my eyes hurt.
Besides being creatively satisfying, it reminded me every morning that I’d essentially finished the book, and that I was working hard to “finalize” it. That is, until an agent or publisher said it wasn’t done.
Sounds as if a lot of passion went into that book, along with the hard work! I think it deserves to succeed. :)
I’ve been on both sides of the editing process, and before I started working as an editor, I learned so much from the editors who worked on my books. One of the things I learned early on was to first focus on all the suggested changes I agreed with and thank the editor for her insights. Then I could address the one thing I could not agree with, giving all the reasons why.
This was for my first hardcover publication, One Small Victory, and the editor wanted me to add a sex scene between the main character and the police officer she was working with as a confidential informant. That couldn’t happen for several reasons – professional boundaries being the main one. The editor saw my points and said I did not have to add the scene.
I worked with that editor on two more books and the process went smoothly. A good editor can be so helpful.
Except for blatant spelling and punctuation errors, a book editor’s comments are generally recommendations. But, because they’re viewing it from an outsider’s perspective, those comments are often valid. In my first (still-unpublished) novel, an editor I hired found a couple of grammar mistakes (e.g. “flower” instead of “flour”), but she also noted that my characters’ eyes seemed to have lives of their own; as if they were independent entities. I realized how ludicrous that sounded from a reader’s viewpoint, so I re-wrote many of those passages. Either way, it’s certainly worth the time, effort and money to hire an independent editor to look over your book and to give serious consideration to their recommended changes.