I’ve always been incredibly fascinated with how people do their jobs and how their brains work. Writers in particular—not being a writer myself, I’m just like, “but you just…make up people? and whole worlds? And then you somehow get them out of your head and onto the page? HOW???”
I don’t think an editor’s brain is quite as exciting as an author’s brain (actually, I am VERY sure it’s not), but I thought you might be interested to know what’s going on in my brain as I edit. So I’m de-mystifying the editing process so you know what’s happening when you send your manuscript off to an editor!
Caveat: This is the process that works for me, a developmental editor and line editor, that I’ve refined over the years, and it’s not necessarily how any other editor works, though I suspect there are probably a lot of similarities. Other editors might work a different way, and that’s cool—just as with writing, there’s no one-size-fits-all model for how to edit.
This process is for my most popular editing package, the All-In, which is a combo of developmental edits and line edits:
First read-through
The first thing I do when I start a new edit is just to read it through, start to finish. Honestly, I usually get caught up in the story and kinda zone out! I’m making very few notes at all during this read, and instead I’m getting the lay of the land—what the story’s about, who the characters are, how they’re motivated, etc. I’m just seeing how things unfold—all vibes, no analysis. (Side note: yes, it is glorious to be able to read for a living. I love my job.)
Second read-through
I let things percolate in my head for a bit and then have a pretty good idea of the things I want to home in on for the second read. This time, I put my editor’s hat on and read to analyze. I’m already familiar with the story elements from the first read-through, so I can go in and start deconstructing them.
Much of this is very intuitive for me up front—I can pick up on something that doesn’t feel right and note it, and then I can go back to that note later to figure out exactly what it was that didn’t feel right. For example, “it feels too fast for MC to be declaring his love here”—why? There needs to be more character development at a certain point earlier in the story so we know why he feels this way by the time we get to that declaration.
I’m taking tons of notes for myself during this second read-through, sometimes knowing exactly what I’m going to suggest, and other times trusting my intuition and figuring it out later. I’m also making small suggestions in the manuscript itself and asking questions there about issues in the story that maybe don’t need to make it into the actual dev edit but need to be answered or clarified. Things like “How did this person get there so fast when the scene before they were across the country?” or “Why are there five arms in this two-person sex scene?”
This is actually the most intensive part of the process, where all the work of thinking is done, and most of the analysis is happening in my notes.
Developmental edits
The dev edit is the part where I translate my notes and thoughts into an edit letter for the author. I group my notes under various headings to provide some structure and organization for the dev edit. The headings vary for each individual edit—sometimes it’s MC1, MC2, Relationship, Theme, Setting, Pacing, or specific issues related to the book (a world-building element, a specific plot point, etc.).
Then, I’m ready to write it up. I start by saying what I liked about the story and then what I’m going to focus on within the dev edit. I also always warn the author that I will ask a TON of questions in the dev edit—these questions provoke thoughts and talking points that we’ll come back to later, and get them thinking about how to incorporate the answers to those questions into their revisions later.
I am a fixer by nature, and as such, I tend to focus on the things that need fixing, rather than accentuating the positives so much. Some people really dig this, especially if they are fixers as well, but my style might not work for everyone, which is fine—I know I’m not for everyone. But my criticism is always constructive, never cruel, and it’s all in service of making the story the best it can be.
At the end of my dev edits, I remind authors that it’s ultimately their choice which of my suggestions they want to use and which ones don’t work for them. If you’re self-publishing, you are the final arbiter of what goes into your book, so you get to decide what works for your story and what doesn’t.
When I send the dev edit to the author, I always tell them to be gentle with themselves in reading it, because I know very well how hard it is to get that much concentrated criticism—however kindly and constructively meant—coming at them all at once. (I haven’t found any other way to soften that blow, so if you have an idea, hit me up!)
Call
Now this is the most fun part of the process to me—the call. The author and I schedule a time to meet on Zoom, and then we go through the dev edit and talk it out. (I record the meeting so the author doesn't have to scramble to take notes—they can just watch it back later.) Sometimes we start from the top of the dev edit and work our way to the end; sometimes we meander around the edit; sometimes the author has specific points they want to focus in on. It’s a lot of brainstorming and bouncing ideas off each other and going “okay, what if we tried this? No, wait, that’s not going to work because of X. So…let’s try this instead. Ooh, yes, that's PERFECT.” It's also a lot of listening on my part as the author works out their ideas as they talk (which, side note, is a great way to revise—talk it out at someone else, or even just at your phone via voice memo or video, so you actually verbalize your thoughts and get them out of your head).
It’s incredibly energizing and exciting to really dial into the characters and what they’re doing with the author during the call—we talk about them like they’re real people (“well, of course she would do that! That’s so her!”), and I think that’s a huge boon for writers who have only really ever had the characters living in their head and haven’t explored them with someone else who’s studied them in depth too. I’ve had writers tell me that this is their favourite part of the process, and it’s definitely mine.
Troubleshooting questions
After the call, the author goes and makes their changes based on the dev edit and what we’ve discussed. I’m still available for questions at this point, and honestly, I don’t think people take advantage of that enough! Writing doesn't have to be solitary, and getting feedback while you write can be really helpful. Email if you need someone who knows the story to say "yep, that works" or "no, but what about this?"
Line edits
Line edits are for making sure the prose is tightened up, no words are wasted, the phrasing is smooth, the tone is hitting right, the story is flowing well, and things are clear and consistent throughout. (Zoraida Cordova of the Deadline City podcast once called line edits “big diction energy,” and I’ve never forgotten it.)
Again, a lot of line editing is intuition to start and just what sounds right in the moment, but if asked, I can always go back and explain exactly why I suggested a change--sometimes it's the cadence of the sentence where the word choice has thrown off the rhythm (and yes, prose has rhythm), sometimes the phrasing is too stiff and doesn't have enough contractions for an easygoing character, sometimes there's a repetitive word or sound or accidental rhyme that makes things too sing-songy, etc..
I do two line edit passes, the first to catch as much as I can, and the second to pick up on anything that I’ve missed and do fine-tuning and last touches. After working so closely on the book with the author before the line edit, I feel like I know the characters and the story and the author’s voice well enough to keep all of that intact. My work should be invisible to a reader, so maintaining the voice is crucial—they shouldn't be able to tell that anyone but the writer has touched the manuscript.
Most romance fiction editors follow the Chicago style guide, and I make corrections as I go to adhere to Chicago. While this attention to Chicago often falls under the domain of copy editors, see above re: me being a fixer—if I see it, I fix it. Also, this can sometimes be a line edit issue—Chicago says you need a comma in between certain phrases, but if the character is a fast-talking Lorelai Gilmore-type, she’s not going to take a breath in between her words, so those commas are only going to slow down the sentence and not accurately reflect the nature of her character. Editing is an art, not a science, and we can bend the rules if we need to!
When line editing historicals, I often check if certain words or phrases were in use at the time in which the story is set for the sake of verisimilitude. The Online Etymological Dictionary and Google ngrams are my friends for this, and very useful resources for historical romance authors.
Once line edits are complete, I send them back to the author, and then my job is pretty much done!