Does Editing a Manuscript get it Published? Part 1 of 12
May 31, 2009
I can say the answer is both yes and no. There can be to much of a good thing. Editing is a vital part to publishing, in fact it is unusual for a manuscript to get several edits from several different people.
It is a great thing if there are major issues with grammar, or spelling. No spell check doesn’t count as an editor. It’s also a great thing when one is working towards the goal of either fiction or non-fiction. Both require major substance edits sometimes. This leads to my question of how does one fix an editing problem?
I have an editor who is great, I suspect she is great because she can tell me what is wrong where and why it is wrong. The how is up to me. By this I mean, an editor can only do so many rewrites or grammar edits and comments. They don’t fix “big” problems. The author (me/you) does. Often it takes longer to fix an edit than it did to write the first draft of a manuscript. Perhaps it is the inner critic that makes it harder, or ego, when you think that one way is better.
Sometimes, however editors and edits are the best thing for both the manuscript and the author. This might mean that you will need to spend some money, but this is in the long term a way to get more of your work published.
For myself, the best part of writing is the first draft. The next parts are harder. Not in the sense that you have to recreate something, more that you need to look through correct and question. I go through any manuscript line by line, reading out loud. This way I can hear the parts that need fixing up. This lets me fix more subtle mistakes as well. I also avoid rethinking to much, which is my biggest hurdle. We all know the one, rewriting one sentence over and over since we don’t want to fix the “big” problem, which can be anything, depending on the writing.
I’ll say this, anything that makes a manuscript better and published sooner is great. One question: As a writer do you have a mentor? (I’ll give my answer tomorrow)