Writing a book is not a single-player RPG

When folks talk about “leveling up” writing craft, they’re slapping possibly the best metaphor in the universe on this process. Because writing a book is almost exactly like game-mastering a role-playing game. In which you are also playing all player characters. Alone. Deep into the night. And recording the whole thing in case someone, anyone, ever wants to hear about your fun made-up adventure that you had with yourself.

First you read the module (get the story idea and some rough sketch of the conflict and setting). Then you roll up heroes (main and secondary characters, with motivations and emotional problems and gear). Then you sit down at your little table for many hours and eat bad food and melt into this strange, magical, wonderful world you’ve devised.

And after you’ve defeated the big boss (written the first draft), it’s time to assign experience points and loot, and … level up.

Yes, leveling up is revision.

When I’m leveling up (revising) a book, the most helpful source books (tools) are going to be

• Critique partners—Get you some! At least one. I have three. These are professional writers who are at or above my skill level (not necessarily writing in my genre; the skill-level match is the key here) and do not hesitate to point out crap that isn’t working. They aren’t “oh I love everything you write” people. They are “eeew”-in-the-margin and “nope, he’d never say this” people. 
• A developmental editor—My publisher hooks me up with editors who read my icky drafts and offer suggestions for making the books better, but if you’re self-publishing, you need to go out and find a good dev editor on your own. Don’t skip this part. I don’t know a writer who turns out perfectly balanced and paced first drafts about adequately motivated characters. And I know some damn impressive writers.
• A read-along performance—I don’t mean you need to get up in front of an audience and read your book aloud. I do mean that you need to read your book aloud, though. Yes, the entire thing. Even those scenes that make you blush. (Have a glass of wine, if you need it.) Read the characters in their own voices and make sure the POVs are sufficiently distinct, the dialogue makes sense, and the chapter-ending hooks make you want to keep reading. If you stumble over a word or sentence when you’re reading it aloud, very likely there’s a problem in that spot. Flag it and move on, and later, you can come back and think, Ha! I spelled teh wrong and spellcheck totally let me down! Because this is not the kind of thing your eyes notice when you’re reading silently. But your mouth realizes that teh is completely unpronounceable and helps you fix all these embarrassing things.
• Beta readers—Contrary to some weird stuff I’ve heard lately, you do not need to pay for beta reading. Find another writer in your genre who you trust, and trade manuscripts. Or find a reader in your genre who is willing to read in exchange for a shout out in the Acknowledgements or chocolate or advance copies of all your books in perpetuity or just to elevate the genre. Note that a beta reader is not a line editor and is not responsible for your commas. You should have already sorted your commas by this point. Also, don’t use your book-buying readers as betas. Readers who buy the book should not also have a duty to tell you that your pacing is off or you’re showing rather than telling all through chapter six (why is it always chapter six?). Readers bought the book. Your job is to make sure that thing they bought is already a quality purchase.
• A line editor—To sort the dangling participles (you have some, I promise) and word repeats and 42-word sentences and language that might trigger or offend a reader in ways you would have never anticipated. A good line edit helps you polish the low-level, sentence-type stuff. It also points out bad habits you didn’t even know you had—oh, hello, overused "just" and made-up verbs! If you publish traditionally, this step might be rolled in with a white-glove treatment on your final revision, or it might be called something else. Regardless of what you call it, though, it’s the pre-copyedit and post-developmental edit. It’s the stage where your sentences learn to shine.
• A copy editor—Even if you are pretty sure you write clean, you still need a copy editor. Everyone needs a copy editor. Copy editors need copy editors. Because none of us are that good all on our own. Also, a good copy editor is not someone who did real well diagramming sentences in sixth-grade language arts. A good copy editor has memorized The Chicago Manual of Style and has training specifically in how to recognize inconsistencies and errors in a book-length manuscript. Get editing samples and references. Important note: you cannot hire a good copy editor for $50 for your 100k-word opus. (Read that sentence again. Cannot.)

So, okay, I lied. 

You aren’t running this adventure alone after all. 

Sure you can bang out the crappy first draft all by yourself at your little table in the dark of night and with Cheeto-stained fingers. But if you want those characters ever to get the Chain Lightning spell or the insta-kill +1 vorpal sword, you’re gonna need to get some other folks in on your game.

Why You Need an Editor. Yes, I'm Talking to YOU

This isn't a great shot, but these little girls are so awesomely adorable. We got to attend our granddaughter's spring dance recital yesterday. The costumes were amazing. So much fun.

Our topic this week at the SFF Seven is editing: do we use editors or do it ourselves, how long does editing take, etc.

As you may have guessed from the title, I'm somewhat passionate on this topic.

Not long ago I saw several authors on a thread discussing whether they still used a developmental editor. This group of guys happened to be all self-publishing authors. One had asked about editing, who people hired, etc. The conversation grew from there, with most of them saying that they used content or developmental editors - which is an initial pass, helping to shape the story - early on in their careers. But, a number of them said, "now that they knew how to write a book/story, etc.," they didn't need to anymore.

I cry utter bullshit on this.

And I'll tell you why!

When I was younger I was a huge fan of both Anne Rice and Pat Conroy. There were a couple of years there where I gave a copy of Conroys' THE PRINCE OF TIDES to anyone I thought might not have read it, for every gift-giving opportunity. Likewise I obsessively followed Anne Rice, and I'll tell you honestly that reading her book THE WITCHING HOUR was a turning point in my life. I could say that's the book that made me want to be a writer.

Not long after that, Anne Rice rather famously went on talk shows to discuss her new book deal, and she said, "Believe me - no one edits Me." (I'd say the emphasis is my own, but she totally said it in bold with capitalization, just like that.)

Then Pat Conroy's BEACH MUSIC came out, which I eagerly devoured. Only to find it so bloated that I couldn't enjoy it. Even as a plain reader, I kept thinking that the book needed to have at least a third of the story trimmed out.

It needed a good developmental editor. So did Anne Rice.

Even though - maybe even particularly if - they didn't think so.

And I'll freely say I think they're both genius writers - but genius writers need editors, too. I'll also put out there that there is no such thing as "figuring out how to write a book/story, etc." Last week at Nebula Weekend, Grandmaster Jane Yolen, who's written over 300 books, said that each novel is different for her and she relearns how to do it every time. Writing isn't making widgets - it's not like you learn how to do it once and then replicate that ad infinitum.

Besides which: I truly believe that it's extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible, for a writer to have an objective view of their own work. We need that outside lens to examine if what we intended to communicate actually made it onto the page.

So, yes, while I do edit myself, I also always use editors, also - content/developmental, line, and copy. If I'm self-publishing, I hire the toughest people I know to put my work through the wringer. In my opinion, not doing that doesn't mean you've "arrived." It only means you're kidding yourself.

The Editorial Paragon

It's once again that time of year in the Pacific Northwest - amazing shows as the light dies at 10PM. We don't always get killer sunsets, but when we do, they make up for lost time. Entire showy epics crammed into a half an hour. It's one of the things about this latitude that I value - the between times last for damned ever. Twilight is measured in hours in the summer. So is dawn. The fact that I love that probably means I fall on some kind of pathological scale somewhere.

This week, (since I missed last week - I am SO sorry) we're talking up editors. I absolutely advocate for finding and clinging to a good editor. Because:

1. A good editor will call you on your bullshit. Let's be honest. When I write, I am so close to a story. It's my baby. I am incapable of objectively looking at it and saying aloud, "Man, you ugly." So I pay someone who will point out the misshapen arc. The half-formed character. The utter and appalling lack of conflict in that scene near the end.
2. HOWEVER. A good editor will also point out what's good in my work, what's working. This isn't just me needing ego stroking. Though pets are nice. The markers of what works gives me sign posts by which I can fix what doesn't work.
3. A good editor will occasionally make suggestions - "Hey, I think you knew what you meant in this scene, and I think this scene is complete in your head. It just didn't make it to paper. I could see adding x, y, and/or z. What do you think?"
4. A good editor communicates in a way that I can process (now, granted, it is incumbent upon me to be professional and easy to work with - no histrionics, no diva-ing. Everything is in service to making a story better.) This requirement is 100% subjective. Only you know when you're in the communication groove with someone, but it is worth pursuing. You should never wonder what it is an editor wants when you're going through your dev edit notes.

So how do you find such a paragon? Ask who edits the books you like. I found the developmental editor for Damned If He Does (did I mention that's available for preorder and comes out July 19??) via Jeffe. I'd seen the editorial work this editor had done on Jeffe's books and I liked the things she called out. So when the time came, I asked for a referral. Author loops are another great place to get suggestions for editors who know your genre and your market. Then it becomes a question of checking websites, emailing back and forth, and getting a sense of how well you understand one another via the written word (since 99% of all communication will be in email or in an editorial letter.)

And once everything is said and done, don't forget to credit your editor. It's often a thankless job, telling writers the baby needs a makeover.

5 Things to Look for When Hiring a Dev Editor

In the world of self-publishing, more than a few authors skip the Dev Edit in favor of good CP or Beta Reader. I am not one of those authors. I have great CPs; however, I very much want and need the perspective and experience a Dev Editor brings to my manuscript.

Note: If I were signed to a publishing house-- small, medium, or large--then the editor assigned to me by the publisher would be my developmental editor (among the many other hats the House Editor wears). 

In addition to the great list Jeffe gave on Sunday about 5 Traits of an Ideal Development Editor, here are...

5 Things to Look for When Hiring a Dev Editor

• They're upfront about rates 
• Look for per-word rather than per-hour rates. You have no control over how quickly the editor does their job. Going rate for a dev editor is $0.025/word for two passes--one for the original submission and one post-first-round edit.
• Some editors offer per-project rates. Do the math, if the project cost is more than the per-word cost, negotiate or find a different editor.
• It is not uncommon for an editor to ask for a percent of the total price up front. This secures your slot in their schedule and confirms commitment from both parties. Paypal is the most common transaction platform.
• If you're like me, your word count will increase--possibly by 10k words--during the editing process. Make sure you've negotiated that probability when talking rates. You may well owe the editor more money in the final payment to cover that bump in word count. 
• They have experience in your genre(s)
• This is imperative. An erotica dev editor is not suited for your space opera. An epic fantasy editor should not be futzing with contemporary horror. You are paying for an expert who knows your genre's tropes and your genre's audience expectations. They're also on point with the past, present, and dawning trends in your genre (regardless of whether you've written to a trend).
• Check their client lists. If they're not posted on the website, ask. Then take the extra step and go to the library and/or buy a few of the books on which they worked by different authors. If you don't have time to read the whole book, then read the opening chapters, random bits from the middle, and the endings. You're not reading for author voice, you're reading for quality of story construct. Keep in mind not every author takes their editor's advice, and not every manuscript can be salvaged by two editing passes. This is why you have a random collection.
• Beware of "all-in-one" companies that offer dev edits but do not disclose the editor or the editor's verifiable qualifications. 
• They communicate in an effective and timely manner
• They should be responsive from the initial inquiry straight through to final edit and invoice. At no point should you ever have to hunt down your editor. A big part of this is a matter of professionalism and applies to any freelancer. It still has to be said because it still applies to a dev editor. If they can't manage their email, imagine what they're doing (or not doing) to your 100k book.
• By contrast, a dev editor is not there to be your therapist or to rewrite the book for you. 
• Phone Calls & Web Chats: Don't assume phone-call reviews of the edits are part of the service provided. Web chats for brainstorming fixes may not be included either. If you are the kind of writer who needs or expects those services, negotiate that up front with the editor. Some dev editors are totally fine with it, some aren't. It's on you make sure your needs are understood and will be met before you agree to employ the editor.
• They provide more than a paragraph of summary comments
• The value of a dev editor directly correlates to the quality of feedback provided. This is what sets them apart from the avid reader, book critic, grammarian, or academic who might be a fan of your genre (or you) but is not qualified to be a dev editor.
• The final product they send back should include a summary that hits on the big picture things including themes, plots, character dev, and even particular stylistic tics you have of which you may not be aware. If you're writing a series and you're using the same editor, the summary should also include comments about the progressing arc of the series.
• The summary should include what works well along with opportunities for improvement. They should be able to communicate this clearly without being an asshole and without being too timid. 
• (You should also be able to take said feedback without being an asshole or too timid.)
• A dev editor should be able to articulate why things work and why they don't. Again, the difference between a beta reader and a professional dev editor. 
• It's okay to ask for an example of a summary letter when contacting a potential editor. Similarly, some editors may ask you for your first chapter so they know whether they want to take you on as a client. 
• They provide more than line-edits in the document
• Note: your dev editor is not your copy editor, but they will call-out glaring issues.
• Beyond noting grammar flaws, there should be comments in the document about what is working and what isn't. "Pacing falls flat here." "Action not true to character here." "Complex setting used only once in story here. Restage?" 
• If you receive a document with nothing more than homophone catches and punctuation fixes, they haven't done their job. 
• Most editing is done via MS Word's Track Changes and sent electronically. I know a few trad publishing houses who still send hard-copy edits. That's atypical in the self-publishing world.

Scheduling: As in all aspects of self-publishing, schedule 2-3 months in advance of needing the dev edits and bake in wiggle room for date slippage during the editing process. Sometimes the edits you get back are WAY more time consuming to address than you'd initially planned. Sometimes, life happens--whether on your end or theirs--and dates have to slip. An extra week is wise.

Bonus Benefits: Many dev editors have teamed up with copy editors, which makes life easier on the author. Often the per-word edit cost includes one copy edit pass. If you're availing yourself of that, make sure the copy editor is a different person from the dev editor. You want fresh eyes on that detail-oriented task.

Where to Find Dev Editors: Networking with other authors. Trade Organizations. Writer's Associations. Publisher sites (many publishers employ freelance editors). As always, check WRITER BEWARE before hiring anyone.

Five Traits of an Ideal Developmental Editor

A good developmental editor is key for taking a book from good to great. Or from meh to great. Or even great wad of suckage to great.

I firmly believe every novelist needs a good developmental editor.

Writers of short fiction benefit from them, too, but novels in particular, with all their unwieldy size and multiple threads really cry out for that help.

What does a developmental editor do?

They are the first stage of professional editing. (Feedback from critique partners and beta readers might come before this.) A developmental editor gives generalized feedback on how the story works - where it could be cut for pacing, where more detail can be added for clarification, where emotion can be amplified, perhaps even reordering of scenes for maximum effect. In short, a developmental editor does what it's impossible in most cases for an author to do: evaluate the work objectively.

But how do you choose a really good developmental editor?

I hear a fair number of authors recommend editors saying "they're really good and they don't change my voice!"

Cringworthy.

Why? Because this is utter nonsense. I don't get this writerly terror of having their voice changed. Let me give you a little clue, folks. I'll even all-cap it so it sticks to your brain better.

NO ONE CAN CHANGE YOUR VOICE BECAUSE IT COMES FROM YOU.

Okay?

Okay!

So, let's talk about the actual topic: Five Traits of an Ideal Developmental Editor

1. They can see both the forest and the trees
   
   An ideal developmental editor has a good feel for the overall scope of a story - or series - and can carefully track key worldbuilding details, to keep the story logic in place.
   
2. They care more about the book being good than your feelings
   
   This is particularly important for self-publishers, because the editor is hired by the writer, instead of by the publishing house. The temptation is to keep the client happy by telling them what they want to hear. This is not good for the book. Find an editor who's willing to tell you what you don't want to hear. Then listen to them.
   
3. They also tell you what works
   
   A good editor is able to give praise as freely and specifically as criticism. Beyond the soul-crushing of editorial critique, well-targeted love can show the flip side, where the craft and the story IS working. It's much easier to fix problems when you can study your own successes, too.
   
4. They're able to offer suggestions for fixes
   
   Not all writers like this, but I love it. A good editor can not only say "this isn't working," but offer ideas for rephrasing, clarification, adding, cutting, etc. A smart, talented and diligent editor cares as much about the book as the writers does and can often see what the writer can't.
   
5. They know the market
   
   The best developmental editors know their genre and what's acceptable within the reader contract. Making a book shine means knowing the potential readership and what they'll expect. Adjusting a story to adhere to genre conventions can mean the difference between delighted readers and an angry mob.

What else? Any traits of an ideal developmental editor that I missed?