Lots of edits do NOT mean you failed as a writer. If you’ve ever received a ton of edits on your work, you’ve probably had a moment where you think, “Oh my god! How could I have missed ALL of these mistakes?” It’s OK. There are 2 really good reasons for all those changes on a piece you thought was flawless: 1. I’m LOOKING for errors. Very specific ones. Editors are trained in what to look for, where, and how. We go through a document methodically in pursuit of inconsistencies, errors, and problems that almost nobody thinks about when they’re doing the writing. 2. As your editor, I don’t just catch “mistakes.” Editing isn’t just typos. I use an outsider’s viewpoint and my professional judgment to point out where improvements could be made. And then I align everything to make it all consistent. I’ve had my own work edited, too. I know that it can be a humbling experience sometimes. But your editor isn’t judging you—they’re just doing a job that not everyone knows how to do.
I have never worked with an editor where my work wasn’t improved, and I try to do the same when I edit other people’s work. I love the process and always learn something!
All of this *and* editing for style: sometimes the thing you wrote may technically correct, but the in house style guide requires a different expression. While we hope writers use the style guide, depending on the writer's exact relationship with the project, it can't be guaranteed.
Exactly this! Although, knowing all of this doesn't always make the editing process less painful 😅 but you know what they say: nothing worth doing in life is easy (except cuddling cats and dogs, and even that's not easy if you're allergic)
I always tell the engineers I work with, "If you get a lot of markups from me, you're *not dumb.* I just had a great time. Anyway, I would do design work for your critique if it would make you feel better!" 😅
The consistency piece is the one that folks outside of the editing world often overlook, but I think it's central to our work as editors. There's no such thing as one style guide—I very rarely just follow Chicago en bloc. Rather, there are layers of styles, tweaks to styles, updates, recommendations, queries—all of the guidelines that make this press different from another. And it's these kinds of things that folks get when they hire a seasoned editor like yourself!
As someone who’s made her living her entire life writing and editing, it’s also true that editors sometimes have the “happy/glad” affliction, the “don’t let perfect get in the way of good” temptation, or the “I must justify my existence” disorder.
Excellent observations. I grew a thick skin very early in my career. As a "contributing editor" at a magazine, my work was edited by multiple editors. Seeing all the red marks always made me cringe and I doubted my writing abilites. BUT - it also made me a much better writer and editor. Edits are never meant to be a a personal attack, but should be considered constructive criticism. Now that I think about this, I remember my 4th or 5th grade teacher yellng at us when we misspelled something. He would yell, "Look it up!" and slam a dictionary on our desk. I also remember at least one kid whining and saying, "It's not in the dictionary!" And Mr. Dempsey would flip through, find the entry, show it to the kid for about two seconds, and he would slam the book shut and said, "Now you look for it!" He made some of the little girls cry. I learned a lot back then, too.
Writers are often still deep in the weeds when they get their manuscript back, so the volume of edits can feel overwhelming at first. But a heavy edit isn’t a judgment — it’s perspective. Editors see the things the writer’s brain has been too close to notice. Most of the time, the edits simply bring forward what the writer was already trying to do.
I hear you. Been on both sides. When I am a writer, I can almost feel the difference between genuine editing, as in, that which improves the piece, and ego-centric editing, in which the editor sets out to make it about themselves (yes, those editors exist). Consistency in editing is what makes it work, I think. Even when I am an editor, I try to stick to the writer's voice while adding my edit requests based solely from the reader's perspective.
Absolutely! Editors (well, the good ones) never judge their client. It's so hard for anyone, even editors, to find mistakes in their own writing. And editing and writing are completely different skills, so even if I'm picking up a lot of things in a proofread, I'm more than likely awed at the writer's skill of writing a fantastic story than being hung up on the errors I'm finding.