The editing experience (for the editor)
And how does it differ between in-house, agent edits, and freelance editing?
It’s official: I’m supporting myself by freelance editing - have been since the end of July. But in the last week or two, things have really ramped up. I built my own website and was accepted as an editor by Reedsy (an unexpectedly rigorous process - really, they only take VERY qualified editors). As I take these new steps, I’ve been reflecting a lot on what kinds of editing I’ve experienced over my career, and that’s what I’d like to explore in this post.
If you’re a writer, I hope this’ll provide insight into the various types of editors you might encounter along your writing journey and what the job really involves from the editor’s side. However, I’d like to be clear about one thing: hiring an editor yourself prior to querying agents is not a ‘necessary’ part of the route to traditional publication. The majority of successful writers aren’t edited formally prior to gaining an agent.
Editing In-House
As an ‘in-house’ editor at a publisher, you typically receive a salary from that publisher to work on the books you (or more senior editors at the company) have acquired. Generally, you do not receive any money over your salary (e.g. no bonuses if one of the books you edited hits the bestseller list). Ultimately your aim is to prepare your books to meet a real-life, paying readership, and to work as part of a team to help sell as many copies as possible.
As an in-house editor I’d work on each manuscript closely with the author but always in parallel with many conversations with the wider team. Marketing, publicity, rights and sales were all part of those conversations. So, all the way through the process, you have an eye on making it the best book possible, but also an eye on ‘how will this be sold? What will make it more marketable and profitable?’
From an author’s perspective, this may sound a little overwhelming - but a good editor should be an effective filter for market and other considerations and enable a primarily creative experience for the author.
A few benefits of working in-house…
Support. If there was a book I was struggling with, I could always ask another member of the editorial team for a second opinion. There’s also an expectation that if you missed anything, someone further down the line is likely to pick it up!
No project is more financially valuable to you than the next since you’re on a salary - plus, the standard of editing in a publishing house is always very high. Yes, there are differing priorities (like when a book is scheduled or whether it’s a lead title) but ultimately every book receives the same editing treatment.
You can build long-term relationships with your authors. This doesn’t always happen, but when it works it’s amazing. Over the eight years I was at Chicken House, I worked with some authors nearly the entire time, building really close and collaborative parternships. I loved this so much.
And some other considerations…
You don’t always get to work on what you want to work on. At the beginning of your career, you are unlikely to be acquiring your own projects - and even when you’re more senior, it’s not guaranteed that you’ll work solely on your own books. That means you may not feel passionate about every book you work on. Similarly, you can’t acquire any type of project you like - you have to stick within the remit of your list.
Deadlines are tight. Publication schedules and deadlines can be pretty strict. That puts pressure on you but also means you sometimes have to be the ‘bad cop’ and push authors hard to meet deadlines. Equally, you may keep some authors who are lower on the priority list waiting for months, through no choice of your own!
Often, you don’t have a choice about whether you continue to work with authors, no matter how much you like them or their books. If their books aren’t selling, the publisher can make the call not to continue.
Editing as an Agent
If there’s anything I’ve learned from conversations with my lovely agent pals, it’s that no two agents edit quite the same (which is part of the reason it’s so important to discuss their editorial approach on The Call). Here are some of the benefits from the editing agent’s perspective…
You can do as much or as little as you want. If you feel a book is good to go, it is totally valid to simply hit send. If you think it needs a massive structural edit, and the author is amenable, you can do that too. There is no formal process for preparing a book to go on submission.
Editing as an agent happens in partnership with your author; you are working together to prepare a book to meet editors. Neither of you earn a penny until the book sells - you’re a team. I loved that about agenting!
The purpose of editing is to bring out the potential of the manuscript, to entice editors. It’s a ‘selling’ edit - not a ‘this has to be 100% perfect’ edit.
You only take on books you feel passionate about. AND often you can take on a much broader variety of projects. You don’t have to stick to any particular genre or age-group, unless you want to. You can also continue to work with an author, if you like, for as long as they are happy to work with you - even if their first project doesn’t sell.
No hard deadlines - those are up to you and the author!
And other considerations…
This is the big one. You never know whether a book is going to sell, therefore you never know whether you are going to be paid, at some point, for all the editorial effort you put in. That means very intensive edits can be inadvisable unless you feel extremely confident. The more editorial time you put in, the higher the advance you receive needs to be to make it worth it - it’s all a big gamble!
You don’t necessarily have any support. When I was agenting, I was the only agent on my team specializing in fiction. So I didn’t have the option of asking for a second read from someone else. That’s a lot of pressure on you to get through editorial roadblocks alone and make the call as to when a book is good to go.
Editing as a Freelancer
The first time I freelanced, I worked nearly exclusively for two main clients: Chicken House (who hired me to finish off the projects I’d been working on in-house) and a scouting agency, for whom I read new children’s fiction and wrote reports for international publishers and film/TV executives.
This time, I’ve had to broaden my base. I still work for a couple of publishers, but the volume of work wasn’t enough. Publishers always hire freelance copy-editors and proofreaders but it’s relatively unusual for them to require freelance support for structural, developmental and line editing, which are more in my ballpark. So, I’ve started working directly with authors too - both via writing organizations like Jericho writers (where I offer query package and opening section reviews), and even more directly through Reedsy (where I’m offering developmental edits and editorial assessments too). The benefits…
You can take on what you want, within reason. Bills have to be paid, so your flexibility isn’t unlimited - but as long as you are receiving enough offers of work, you can choose where to focus your energy.
Your client base is varied. You can adapt your approach to who you are working with and what their requirements are - no two projects are exactly the same, which is really fun and keeps you nimble.
An author trusting you - directly - with their work is very special. Editing isn’t cheap and the thought and time a lot of authors put into the decision to hire an editor - and who to hire - means that I really do feel honored when I’m offered work.
You realize the true (monetary) value of your work. Although it’s hard to make an average salary as a freelance editor, I really appreciate how freelancing is showing me the value of my labor. Working in-house, you don’t earn anything extra for a really hard edit that takes you weeks. But as a freelancer, I can.
And some other considerations…
Working directly with authors means they are hiring you. That means you have to meet the author where they’re at and support them in getting to the next stage in the way they envisage (not always in the way that you envisage). You have to be sensitive to what you are being hired to do, and always remember the brief!
You have to set deadlines and stick to them. Unlike working for a publisher, where deadlines are effectively set for you, or working as an agent when there really are none, this is a formal relationship with timelines defined by the editor. You have to have a strong handle on what you’re able to do by when and be highly organized.
Juggling projects can be tough. You don’t necessarily know what’s going to come in and when, and sometimes you may not be in a position to turn down work even if you already have something on your plate. So, I often find myself skipping through several editing projects at once.
As always, please let me know if you have any questions - or ideas of what I should write about in the future!
I’m very much hoping for good news to share next time. Until then!
Kesia
Very informative. I was wondering if you felt so much editing gets in the way of your own voice as a writer or if it stops you falling into the traps we authors set ourselves? Maybe a theme for another post?
At present, I think that we all have to wear so many hats. The fact is that my professional writing career is in limbo: Am I a TV critic, a board game critic, a screenwriter, or a novelist right now? When I'm depressed and wondering how to make it work, that feels like a curse. When I'm working on projects I'm passionate about and can see a path through the muck, it's exhilarating. I'm all of those things, and it may add up to more than their sum. Awful hard to see it from here, though.
I can see over the last few Substacks that you're doing a wardrobe assessment, examining all those hats. It's been illuminating for me, who's a bit of an idealist and shies away from discussing market principles.
Here's hoping all the hats fit eventually.