Becoming Your Own Editor
by Moira Allen
Writers speculate a lot about what editors really do. Some
firmly believe that editors are the final barricade between writers'
excellent manuscripts and publication. Others seem to believe
that the job of an editor is to clean up after writers and tell
them what to do next.
To a certain extent, the latter is true. When a manuscript
comes along that is so magnificent that no amount of typos can
detract from its impact, many editors will clean it up, and gladly.
Usually, though, they must weigh whether such "clean up"
time will be justified by the final product. More often than not,
the answer is no.
You can avoid this answer, however. If you follow these four
easy steps, your editor will be able to judge your work using
the criteria that really count: Its content and style. Better
yet, you'll never have to wonder again about what an editor does,
because you'll be doing it yourself!
Step 1: Get to the Point.
The first thing an editor wants to learn from your manuscript
is its purpose. What is the story you are going to tell, and why?
Why is it important? Don't shroud your purpose in three or four
cleverly written but pointless opening paragraphs.
If you're writing a story about Old Sam, a three-legged border
collie who was the most unforgettable dog you've ever met, don't
start your article with this kind of opener:
"When I got out of college with a few courses of animal
science under my belt, I had little idea how bleak the job outlook
would be. I wandered from clinic to clinic, but no work was to
be had. Then my old buddy Joe, who owned a sheep ranch out on
South Fork Road, offered me a job as a stablehand..."
This sort of opener may ramble on just like buddy Joe's ranch
before the author finally gets to the point: "And that's
where I met Old Sam." All of this information may be important,
but it isn't the point of your story. Old Sam is.
If, on the other hand, your opening sentence is "Old Sam
was the most unforgettable dog I ever met," your editor might
not think you have the world's best knack for opening lines, but
he will know what you plan to talk about up front, and be more
inclined to read on. If that background information is really
necessary, find another way to work it in.
Part of getting to the point is explaining to the editor, and
the reader, why he or she should spend time reading what you have
to say. Why are you writing this particular article? Why are you
writing it now? The answer may lie in your credentials, your personal
experience, or simply in your ability to express important ideas
to the editor's readers.
Let's say that you want to write an article about a new virus
in cats. Why should the reader hear about this from you? The answer
could be that you're a veterinarian who has handled several cases
of the virus and can enlighten
cat owners about it; or you might be a cat owner who learned about
this disease, and you want to share the information you've gathered.
Or, as a writer with a "nose" for a good story, you
might choose to interview both veterinarians and cat owners about
the disease and its effects, providing an article that combines
human appeal with expert information.
The approach you choose will depend upon your market and your
audience, but you should make two things clear from the beginning:
Why this topic is important, and why the editor should accept
you as the best person to write about it. Then let your story
tell itself.
Step 2: Get Organized.
While I was editor of a pet magazine, one of my associates
told me of a trick she had learned to help her organize her thoughts
while writing: "Think in subheads." Just about every
magazine or newspaper story of any length is broken into smaller
chunks, each set off with a subhead. Those subheads make the page
look better visually, and lead the reader through an organized
series of ideas.
If you look at your article carefully, you'll probably find
that it breaks down into three or four major component ideas.
Thinking of subheads for these ideas gives you a chance to organize
your thoughts into the appropriate categories, almost like creating
an outline for the article after it has been written. You may
find during this process that you need to flesh out one of your
ideas in greater detail, cut back on another, or add yet a third.
Your subheads don't have to be cute or catchy; their primary purpose
is to help you organize your material (and to demonstrate that
organization to the editor).
Step 3: Get rid of the clutter.
When you break your article into subheads, you may find that
you have some ideas that don't belong under any of the categories
you've roughed out. This may mean one of two things: You need
another subhead, or you don't need that material at all. The information
might serve as a basis for another manuscript, but will only clutter
this one.
It can be painful to look at a stack of notes and realize that,
even though it took you hours to get that information, you can't
use it all in your article. But part of your job is precisely
that: Deciding what is most important about the information you've
amassed, and presenting that--and only that--to your readers.
If you leave it to an editor to pluck the gems from the clutter,
he may simply pluck a rejection slip from the drawer instead.
So read through your work again. Once you've organized it,
you'll find it easier to spot ideas that are only tangential to
the main subject, or identify background material that is interesting
but doesn't contribute a great deal to the basic idea. Try pulling
some of this material out of the main text and presenting it as
a sidebar.
Suppose, for example, that you are writing about cancer treatments
at a particular clinic, and you've found some interesting information
about another clinic or another method that seems promising. If
that information doesn't belong in the main body of your piece,
write it up as a complementary sidebar. If the editor likes your
sidebar and has room for it, you may even get paid extra for it.
But if not, you won't have jeopardized the success of your main
article by cluttering it with extra information.
Step 4: Keep it "clean."
Whenever an editor receives an all-but-illegible manuscript,
filled with typos, the first reaction is that the writer doesn't
care enough about the magazine or its audience to present the
best article he can. The editor will be prejudiced against such
an article from the beginning, and the writer will have to work
twice as hard to prove that the content of the article outweighs
the sloppy presentation.
Unfair? Maybe. But if a writer doesn't check for the typos
and grammatical errors--the easy stuff--an editor is bound to
wonder whether that writer was any more careful where it counts.
When a manuscript is littered with misspellings, what assurance
does the editor have that the writer has checked facts, verified
every phone number, and doubled-checked figures and the spellings
of names?
Editors also get irritated by the idiosyncracies of computer
printouts. While computers have come a long way, remember that
if you are asked to submit an electronic copy of your article
(particularly in text format), your editor may have to deal with
weird characters that creep in where you've specified formatting
commands (such as underlining or italics). Editors also don't
care to deal with the weird spacing that results when you justify
the right margin. Leave that sort of formatting to the magazine;
when submitting your manuscript, do as little formatting as possible.
Be careful, also, of errors that creep in when you make corrections
or changes. It's easy to miss duplicate sentences, or half-sentences,
or bizarre formatting problems that result from careless corrections.
Don't just hope the editor can figure out what you meant to do;
do it right the first time.
Finally, editors like to know that you know they exist, and
that you know what is going on with their publications. When an
editor receives a manuscript addressed to his predecessor's predecessor
(it's happened to me!), he can't help but wonder how recently
the author has examined a copy of the magazine.
The penultimate sin, of course, is to leave out your self-addressed,
stamped envelope. Make sure that you've put enough postage on
your SASE; I've known writers to slap a single first-class stamp
on a 9x12 manila envelope that would require additional postage
to mail even if it were empty. (The ultimate sin, of course, is
to allow your manuscript to arrive with postage due.)
So take another look at that manuscript you're about to put
in the mail. Did you read it through with an editor's eyes--the
eyes of someone who has never seen it before and doesn't know
in advance what you're trying to say? Is your print clean and
dark? Is there enough postage on both envelopes? If you've answered
"yes" to all of these questions, congratulations! You've
begun to think like an editor--and removed another barrier between
you and success.
Copyright © 2001 Moira Allen
This article originally appeared in The Writer.
Moira Allen, editor of Writing-World.com, has published more than 350 articles and columns and eight books, including How to Write for Magazines, Starting Your Career as a Freelance Writer, The Writer's Guide to Queries, Pitches and Proposals, and Writing to Win: The Colossal Guide to Writing Contests. Allen has served as columnist and contributing editor for The Writer and has written for Writer's Digest, Byline, and various other writing publications. In addition to Writing-World.com, Allen hosts TimeTravel-Britain.com (a site dedicated to historic travel destinations in Britain); Mostly-Victorian.com (a growing archive of articles and excerpts from Victorian books and magazines); The Pet Loss Support Page; and AllenImages.net (showcasing her photography). She can be contacted at
editors "at" writing-world.com.
This article is available for reprint at no charge.
Click here for details!
|
MORE RESOURCES FROM WRITING-WORLD.COM: | |
|
|