Entry 4: November 21, 2009
By Christine
I started working in publishing out of college, first as a sales rep, then as an acquisitions editor. I worked in-house until my husband finished grad school and got his first job in Spain. It had never occurred to me to try the “other” editor jobs; in my company it all seemed very clear who was cut out for what. The developmental editors I worked with were very calm, thorough, steady people and I tend more towards high energy for short sprints.
Our plan had been to stay in Spain for one year and that I would not work, but it was quite boring and lonely, so I started teaching English. One of my students worked at an EU organization and hired me to be on site 2 hours a day to edit the speeches and essays and articles her staff was responsible for preparing. They all spoke English, but as a second (or third, or fourth) language, and everything they produced had to be written in English. This morphed into more editing work, and then one day a friend of mine who is a professor in the US asked me to edit a chapter she was writing for a book. She then recommended me to another friend, and from there my business was born.
My high-energy sprinting personality turns out to be perfect for the type of developmental editing I do because it seems everything arrives a week before the deadline. I suppose I am not a traditional DE as I get things long after they should have been organized. I am like a hired gun DE, taking something complexly academic, convoluted, and generally written by a non-native English speaker and turning it into something readable, understandable, and compelling.
I love the work. Things are constantly new. I learn about all sorts of things: translation of literature from Persian, cultural politics, the sociology of the Lebanese in Mexico, the history of aerospace technology in Spain. I work on theses, dissertations, articles, essays, and book manuscripts and the occasional business document or presentation. I have three little children and can work around their schedules. I have to be very organized to get it all done but I like being busy and the people I work with are also extremely pressed for time, so there is a sense of collegiality though I do all my work over the internet.
- Scott Norton
- I am an editor at the University of California Press and author of the first full-length handbook ever published on the subject of developmental editing.
Showing posts with label DE History Project. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DE History Project. Show all posts
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
I Saw the Need for DE Deepening on University Campuses
Entry 3: October 11, 2009
By Amy
I fell into editing as a graduate student as a part-time job, working for a professor, and enjoyed it. When tenure-track jobs in my own field (English) evaporated after I graduated, I saw the need for developmental editing deepening on university campuses as presses seemed able to provide less and less of it. I had taught writing for years and published my own book by then and was able to translate that into a job working with faculty on developmental editing issues. I also facilitate lectures and discussions around issues in publishing on campus. So that's my bit for your project. What I'm curious about now is how the field will change with more on-line projects and various styles and genres of writing that academics do online.
By Amy
I fell into editing as a graduate student as a part-time job, working for a professor, and enjoyed it. When tenure-track jobs in my own field (English) evaporated after I graduated, I saw the need for developmental editing deepening on university campuses as presses seemed able to provide less and less of it. I had taught writing for years and published my own book by then and was able to translate that into a job working with faculty on developmental editing issues. I also facilitate lectures and discussions around issues in publishing on campus. So that's my bit for your project. What I'm curious about now is how the field will change with more on-line projects and various styles and genres of writing that academics do online.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
I Feel as Much Responsibility to the Reader as I Do to the Author and the Publisher
Entry 2: June 1, 2009
By Nancy
I do a lot of freelance copyediting for a mid-size publishing company that specializes in how-to books for artists and crafters. The company's staff editors find potential authors from contacts made at art shows, craft fairs and various artists' associations. Once an artist agrees to produce a book for the company, the editor coaches them through the writing process, suggesting ways to organize and develop instructional material based on the methods they use to create their visual artworks. Although these editorial staff members might be described as "developmental editors," many of the manuscripts they turn over to me for copyediting indicate that they are more interested in developing a saleable product than developing a readable, engaging text.
The authors of the books this company publishes include successful professional artists, television personalities, popular workshop instructors and respected university professors. I don't doubt that they are good at what they do, but many of them are not so good at explaining what they do; and, once the manuscript is beyond the outline stage, the staff editors generally aren't much good at helping them clarify their explanations. Thus it often falls to me—the copyeditor who is supposed to simply make sure that the text is styled consistently and doesn't contain any glaring errors—to determine what the author was actually trying to say, and then figure out how to say it in a way that the reader will be able to understand. (I can't tell you how many times I have had to rewrite entire chapters that purport to explain the mysteries of perspective.) Because I feel as much responsibility to the reader as I do to the author and the publisher, I often find myself doing as much substantive editing as copyediting.
The people who buy how-to books expect them to provide clear, easy-to-follow instructions, but unless a dedicated developmental or substantive editor has been involved, such books may fail to meet that expectation. It has been my experience that some publishing companies lack the resources—or, perhaps, the will—to provide that kind of dedicated service.
By Nancy
I do a lot of freelance copyediting for a mid-size publishing company that specializes in how-to books for artists and crafters. The company's staff editors find potential authors from contacts made at art shows, craft fairs and various artists' associations. Once an artist agrees to produce a book for the company, the editor coaches them through the writing process, suggesting ways to organize and develop instructional material based on the methods they use to create their visual artworks. Although these editorial staff members might be described as "developmental editors," many of the manuscripts they turn over to me for copyediting indicate that they are more interested in developing a saleable product than developing a readable, engaging text.
The authors of the books this company publishes include successful professional artists, television personalities, popular workshop instructors and respected university professors. I don't doubt that they are good at what they do, but many of them are not so good at explaining what they do; and, once the manuscript is beyond the outline stage, the staff editors generally aren't much good at helping them clarify their explanations. Thus it often falls to me—the copyeditor who is supposed to simply make sure that the text is styled consistently and doesn't contain any glaring errors—to determine what the author was actually trying to say, and then figure out how to say it in a way that the reader will be able to understand. (I can't tell you how many times I have had to rewrite entire chapters that purport to explain the mysteries of perspective.) Because I feel as much responsibility to the reader as I do to the author and the publisher, I often find myself doing as much substantive editing as copyediting.
The people who buy how-to books expect them to provide clear, easy-to-follow instructions, but unless a dedicated developmental or substantive editor has been involved, such books may fail to meet that expectation. It has been my experience that some publishing companies lack the resources—or, perhaps, the will—to provide that kind of dedicated service.
Clients Call It Copyediting, But They Want DE
Entry 1: June 1, 2009
By Anonymous
I was hired as the “editor” of a small Southern California-based medically oriented academic press in 1983. In essence, I was the Editorial/Production chief. I asked for and received the title of managing editor.
I hold a B.S. in Journalism, having been graduated with honors in my subject. In addition to taking courses in editing, I was an editor for the campus student-written newspaper and broadcast news. My training as an editor included proofing, style, spelling, punctuation, and other routine copyediting. In addition, sense, organization, and content cohesiveness were, to me, vital aspects of “just” editing. I find that the final list is now, more often than not, considered developmental editing.
Before 1983, I had worked as a community newspaper reporter and editor and was a local publicist for 10 years as an account executive for an agency with clients in medical, financial, and entertainment fields.
Before joining the academic press, I spoke with a senior editor with the local office of a major trade/academic publisher. A close paraphrase of his response to my journalism degree. “Forget about it. I am grandfathered in. They don’t want people who know and care about written language communication anymore. They only hire editors who are only knowledgeable in subjects.” The same week at a community potluck dinner, I met a recent physics graduate who was thrilled to no longer have to write school papers. She had just been hired as an editor with the local office of the major trade/academic publisher.
My eventual employer had been criticized for poor editing by its board of directors just before I walked into the door.
I thought I was copyediting. I was really developmental editing. My work was highly praised and not well-paid. Eventually, I left the staff and became a freelancer. The small academic press continues as a major client.
I primarily write indexes. I have just been talked back into editing. Clients call it copyediting, but they want developmental editing. I am somewhat better paid now than when I exchanged an emphasis on editing to one of indexing. Indexing still pays better.
By Anonymous
I was hired as the “editor” of a small Southern California-based medically oriented academic press in 1983. In essence, I was the Editorial/Production chief. I asked for and received the title of managing editor.
I hold a B.S. in Journalism, having been graduated with honors in my subject. In addition to taking courses in editing, I was an editor for the campus student-written newspaper and broadcast news. My training as an editor included proofing, style, spelling, punctuation, and other routine copyediting. In addition, sense, organization, and content cohesiveness were, to me, vital aspects of “just” editing. I find that the final list is now, more often than not, considered developmental editing.
Before 1983, I had worked as a community newspaper reporter and editor and was a local publicist for 10 years as an account executive for an agency with clients in medical, financial, and entertainment fields.
Before joining the academic press, I spoke with a senior editor with the local office of a major trade/academic publisher. A close paraphrase of his response to my journalism degree. “Forget about it. I am grandfathered in. They don’t want people who know and care about written language communication anymore. They only hire editors who are only knowledgeable in subjects.” The same week at a community potluck dinner, I met a recent physics graduate who was thrilled to no longer have to write school papers. She had just been hired as an editor with the local office of the major trade/academic publisher.
My eventual employer had been criticized for poor editing by its board of directors just before I walked into the door.
I thought I was copyediting. I was really developmental editing. My work was highly praised and not well-paid. Eventually, I left the staff and became a freelancer. The small academic press continues as a major client.
I primarily write indexes. I have just been talked back into editing. Clients call it copyediting, but they want developmental editing. I am somewhat better paid now than when I exchanged an emphasis on editing to one of indexing. Indexing still pays better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
