But Why Does Editing Cost So Much?

Photo source: Skitterphoto via Pexels

As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

If I had a quarter for every time someone expected me to edit their work for free ("have fun with it" was my all-time favorite) or questioned the project's cost, I'd be . . . maybe not rich, but I'd probably have enough to cover a project.

Whenever I hear someone complain about the cost of things, I mentally go through a few scenarios. First, I try to find out the specific item and the dollar amount that's being discussed, and then I attempt to reason out what is being provided for the cost.

BUT WHY: THE VALUE
In some cases, I want to know what it's made of (is this desk pressboard or solid wood?) before making a determination of value. Is $100 reasonable for a high-quality piece of stainless steel cookware because I'll only buy it once in my lifetime, rather than replace a cheaper type every few years because it wears out or cooks unevenly? (Spoiler alert: this is a no-brainer for me. I'm a firm believer in good cookware.)

BECAUSE: THE VALUE
A well-edited manuscript has greater value to the reader than an unedited (or poorly edited) one. A reader doesn't want to slog through sentences that need a second look to make sense . . . or typos, bad grammar, and so much repetition that the story becomes tedious. Well-written books are cherished and reread, given as gifts, and recommended to others.

BUT WHY: THE TIME INVOLVED
If a service is being performed, I need to decide what's more valuable to me: the time that's freed up by having someone else do the task, or the money I'd save by doing it myself. It may well be worth paying someone to come to my home to vacuum, dust, and mop once every week or two if I'm extremely busy and the house is falling apart because we're all going different directions at once. On the other hand, if I'm home all day, am able-bodied, and don't have small children around, it might be difficult to justify that expense when I have the time and good health to take care of things myself.

BECAUSE: THE TIME INVOLVED
Editing an average manuscript for a novel can take me about 40 hours or more. If the edit is a heavier one, that number can easily double. I've logged in over 70 hours on just a first round of heavy edits before. If a book edit is going to take weeks of my time, then it needs to compensate for weeks of income because it's time I can't use to schedule anything else. This is why it's always a good idea to get your manuscript in the best shape possible before sending it off to an editor. A more polished manuscript means the editor can often work faster, which usually means a lower cost to you. It's fine to not worry about it and "let the editor catch that," but that will directly affect the price.

BUT WHY: THE SKILL/EXPERTISE
Face it: there is no possible way for a person to exhibit a professional level of skill in every area of life. Just ask anyone who's ever done a major home renovation. There's a reason that contractors hire out the specialty things like drywall finishing, plumbing, electrical wiring, and more. I may be able to change an outlet, but it doesn't mean I'm capable or licensed to rewire my whole house. I can create decent enough images for the editing quotes I post weekly on Instagram or Twitter, but I hired a graphic designer to create the branding for my business because it was important for my logo to not look like a DIY project.

BECAUSE: THE SKILL/EXPERTISE
There's a great quote I love by Amy Einsohn, author of The Copyeditor's Handbook:

In many ways, being a copyeditor is like sitting for an English exam that never ends: at any moment, your knowledge of spelling, grammar, punctuation, usage, syntax, and diction is being tested.

You can love to read and not know all the rules. You can get irked by other people's grammar mistakes and still not catch the ones you make. You can be a writer and still have to look up some of the usage and trends of our ever-changing language. You wouldn't want someone who made a birdhouse once to be the person you hire to put an addition on to your home. Let the professionals do what they're best at; we love what we do and will take care of things you didn't even know were in need of attention.

I'll leave you with a direct quote from an editor I know, because I've also been hired for those re-edits she mentions.

My own thoughts when someone says they can "find someone else to do it for only $200" usually run along the lines of "Yes, you can. A lot of my work has come from re-editing those $200 jobs, so I know those kinds of prices can be found."

Respect the value. Respect the time spent. And respect the expertise. You won't regret it. 

Editors: We Are Not the Grammar Police!

Editors.

We are a long way from what most people think we are. We are not the bossy know-it-alls who glory in telling authors how bad they suck. We're not J. Jonah Jameson, shouting at the writers who hand us their copy with trembling hands. We're not inflexible about THE RULES and how they should be followed.

We're not even the people who correct everyone's Facebook posts, believe it or not.

We're people who just enjoy polishing words and phrases. People who help to clarify meaning by adjusting structure. People who like to make sure the image a writer wishes to create is the image that comes across in the narrative.

One of the things that grows old fast for an editor is when someone calls us the grammar police. (Worse yet, a grammar Nazi, because only the Nazis were/are Nazis, and it's an abhorrent term that should not be tossed about lightly, comparing someone who corrects text with someone who committed genocide. But I digress.)

The term "grammar police" implies that editors lie in wait, hoping for someone to mess up so they can publicly shame them. Even the real police don't do that. Well . . . maybe the state troopers who ticket speeders on the highway do that.

But back to me.

I mean, other editors.

Okay, me. AND other editors.

We love a well-turned phrase, but honestly, the feeling of the fix and polish is more of a feeling of accomplishment for our own skills, not a feeling of superiority over the person whose work we're reading through.

I can't tell you how many times I've had acquaintances make a comment to me along the lines of "I'm so paranoid to write anything on your Facebook wall without rereading it a dozen times" or "Gosh, you're probably cringing as you read my post" or any number of variations on that theme. Let me set the record straight:

• I don't correct someone's writing unless they're paying me for it, or have specifically asked me to do so. 
• I don't always use proper English when I speak—just like everyone else when they talk. 
• I don't use proper punctuation (other than for clarity) when I'm typing in a private chat window or text with a friend.
• And I never EVER correct someone publicly on social media, especially strangers.

Those people who take joy in that type of overzealous behavior are jerks, plain and simple. Half the time, they don't even know the real rules (or the change in language that makes a certain style now obsolete) but simply want to show someone (strangers? and why?) that they're smarter than someone else. Quoting what we call "zombie rules," i.e. habits or styles that are/were popular but not actually rules that must be followed, is almost always done by those who have no basis for what they're insisting on. And yet the drive-by editors still do it with regularity.

Denise Cowle has a great blog post about why the grammar police aren't cool. When it was recently shared in an editing group, almost every editor in the group agreed that they don't like being viewed that way and don't behave that way. Again, it's always those who don't actually know what's what who shout the loudest. Where she reminds us that we need to be kind, she says, "If you're lucky enough to have benefited from a good education, and you don't have to wrestle with a learning difference such as dyslexia, be thankful and be gracious."

Graciousness and kindness never hurts. You never know when someone is writing in their second language, or with a disability, or whose speech-to-text program doesn't quite catch everything.

Another terrific post that addresses this is "4 Reasons Why Freelance Writers Shouldn't Be Grammar Police" by Linda Formichelli. It might be more aptly named "Why Grammar Police Make Boring Writers," because that's what inevitably happens when rules (or supposed rules) are adhered to without nuance or voice being considered: it's sterile and boring.

Grammar police? I think I'd rather be known as the Shiny Word Fairy or something like that. Since my goal is not to sterilize anything, but to make someone's work sparkle, I think it's fitting.

Thanks for listening, folks!

Love,

Lynda, the Shiny Word Fairy

WRITING MISCONCEPTIONS: We Don't Want to Steal Your Book

At least once a month, I see a question on writing or editing forums that sounds roughly like this:

"I am almost ready to hire an editor for my manuscript, but I'm scared of someone stealing my work. What legal measures do you all have in place to make sure this doesn't happen?"

I'm going to generalize quite a bit here, so if you don't feel this way or haven't run into this before, please don't get indignant. I understand that every writer doesn't think like this. However . . .

I've found that if there are only writers in the group, there are always at least a few who "have heard of this happening so often" and that's why they either self-edit only, copyright their work beforehand, or have a recommended editor sign a nondisclosure agreement.

If there are a lot of editors in the group, the general response runs more along the lines of this:

• I have never considered stealing someone's work.
• I have been in this business for over twenty years and have never heard of this actually happening to anyone.
• I have never met anyone who can give me a real name of someone they know who has had this happen to them.
• The people who need the NDA the least (e.g. new/inexperienced authors) are usually the ones asking about theft, and those who have the most experience typically don't ask. Those who insist are also the people who are generally difficult to work with and don't deal well with changes or criticism.
• I already have a confidentiality clause in my contract and if that's not good enough, I don't want to work with that person. An NDA request from an indie fiction author is often a red flag that they don't understand how the publishing process works.
• I'm a writer myself and have my own story ideas to worry about, and don't have the time or energy to redevelop yours . . . OR
• I'm not a writer. I'm an editor. Editors are not "frustrated writers" who need to steal ideas to feel validated in the writing world.

I saw it pop up again just the other day as I was working on this post. This time, the author was asking about beta readers and how a writer can feel safe, sending their work off to strangers who might steal it. Yet, he was having trouble getting friends and family to beta for him. (The whole "friends and family" thing is fodder for another post. No worries, you'll read about it here.)

The general concensus among experienced writers and editors is that some authors spend a lot of time on author-only pages, and the misinformation they come away with in regard to publishing is astounding. It reminds me of the Yahoo Answers boards where a bunch of people "answer" a question with "I don't know," or "I've always thought [fill in the blank]." There are no legitimate answer-givers and no one to contradict anyone with actual facts.

Here are some facts—from real editors I interact with—that will hopefully reassure any skittish writers:

• If I stole people's work, I wouldn't be in business very long.
• Anyone who knows anything at all about copyright and intellectual property laws knows it wouldn't be worth the risk.
• No self-respecting professional would even think about it.
• Most of stolen books are stolen AFTER they're published. They are stolen by people who have never had contact with the author, and who don't care about copyright.
• Even if you are the next Stephen King or J.K. Rowling, we would still not steal your work, but we'd be very happy to make your acquaintance and be your editor. VERY happy.

It's the End-of-Year Reflections Post!

The end of the calendar year signifies a particular thing to each person; it's a natural thing for people to reflect. It may mean the end of a nightmare year of bankruptcy for one person, or it may celebrate a major life change like having a baby or getting married.

It's a good habit to reflect as the year comes to a close, to learn what worked and what didn't, and to plan for the future. I like to do this personally, but in the past couple years I've been doing it for my business too. 

One of the big lessons I didn't start to learn until a few years into the business was that there is more than just working for the business. There is working at the business. Working to ensure that there will be more business, in fact—something I didn't have to think about in the first year because clients were somehow finding me. I was busy and didn't even have to try to stay that way. 

If I had to sum it up, I'd say this is the year I tried to make the best use of my time. I looked through my analytics to see what was working and what wasn't. I kept a spreadsheet of completed jobs and how much time I invested in them. I used a timer app to break down where, exactly, my computer time was spent. (I was shocked to know that sifting through and answering email was one of my biggest time sucks.) I decided to learn everything I could to make my work more efficient and to broaden my skills so I can provide a wider variety of services someday. I took some classes, and I read an awful lot of books. I'm proud to say that I'm a better editor today than I was four years ago, or even two years ago. 

The happy result of this has been that 2018 has been a year of growth, and I'm pretty excited to look over my job list and note how many new clients I've gained and where I've gotten them from. Some have become friends and others are simply clients I've enjoyed getting to know while working on their projects. It's been a lot of fun to work on a handful of nonfiction projects this year as well.

I've done beta reading for a few authors, numerous line edits and copyedits, worked on doctoral dissertation papers, and even proofed someone's website. All that variety kept me fresh.

So THANK YOU, J.T. Buckley, Marcia Caton, Ciofki, Raylene Demeester, Adam & Peggy Dresden, Darrell Haemer, Rhonda Denise Johnson, Heidi Love, Carol Mills, Kim Mower, Kristen Snarski, Jack Tyler, Kim Watt, and Stephanie Workman. You've helped to make this a great year!

Tell Me Your Favorites

Today's post is going to be a cheater post of sorts. For all the planning I do and all the ideas I have running around in my brain, I somehow managed to not have a post ready for today.

I've been busy with edits, which is always fun. It means I'm honing my skills, getting to know new people, and expanding my horizons. Always a good thing!

This may seem a little early—and it in no way implies that I'm actually organized about it—but I'm looking ahead to next year and what it means for this blog and my business in general. As I plan out my weeks and months and seasons of 2019, I'd like to get a grasp on what interests my readers the most.

Honestly, I have no idea how many people read this blog. A look at my analytics tells me I have hundreds of followers. I have hundreds of views per month, on a variety of posts. But I have only about a dozen regulars who comment. And I love the comments, not just because you guys are loads of fun—and the comment section can often be more interesting than the post itself—but also because they let me know who is actually reading. For all I know, half the numbers are bots.

Are my readers experienced authors who already know what I'm writing about? Am I just confirming good information and reassuring them that they're doing it right?

Are there new writers out there who have never heard some of this stuff before? Am I a helpful resource for commonly tricky topics? Jack Tyler's blog, Riding the Blimp, has a huge variety of topics (depending on the day) but his advice posts are geared toward young/new writers who need basic guidance on how to start off well. I'm certain he saves a lot of newbies some relearning time in the long run. The IWSG (Insecure Writer's Support Group) blogs about writing and resources and publishing, and it's geared toward writers old and new. Writers After Dark has a library full of resources and checklists, a writers' podcast, blog posts from award-winning authors, and—if you just need a break and some laughs to refocus—a "Wit Without Wisdom" podcast that covers all the topics on the internet no one else will touch.

What would you like to see for the upcoming months? For next year? I have a handful of authors lined up for Book Talk, and I'm excited to introduce them to you. I'm sure I'll never run out of Circular File examples to share, where strangers ask me to work for them for free. I have a few multi-post series ideas up my sleeve. But what is interesting to YOU? Is there a topic no one else has covered, or something you struggle with in your own writing? I'd love to know.

Let's have your best ideas, folks! Tell me your favorites, if you've had any, and let me know what you'd like to see more of. I'm open.

Editor's Notes #41: Best Books on Writing and Editing Part 1—My Thoughts

As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more here.


Now that the first couple weeks of January are a tired memory of back to work, back to school, back to healthy eating, a wee bit of self-care and readjustment to routine, I'm ready to get things rolling again here. I have a lot of things I'm excited about this year, and one of them deals with my reading life, of course.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I had a few sort-of goals for 2017 that were more in my head than written anywhere, but since I had so few of them, they were pretty easy to remember.

For my professional growth, I set out to have one non-fiction book—related to editing or writing—happening at all times. This one yielded some fun reads. And before you say that there is nothing funny about grammar and "How to Write the More Better Stuff" books out there, I need to stop you. There are some terrific books that are instructional but far from boring (even for those who hate grammar rules). I firmly believe that reading books geared toward the writing craft helps my editing.

Copy editing deals with the hard and fast rules more often than not—the nonnegotiables, as I think of them—so a quick search through The Chicago Manual of Style, Merriam-Webster, the Associated Press Stylebook or similar books will yield answers without much fuss. Commas, punctuation, common spellings, even UK v. US styles . . . all very black and white.

However, line editing is slightly different and involves sentence structure, POV inconsistencies, awkward phrasing, clichés, verb tense, ambiguity, and more. This is where the writing books come in handy for me. The more I know about why sentences are constructed in a particular way for a particular purpose, the better I become at spotting when something is "off." This not only makes the editing itself more thorough, but it also speeds up my work process as I become more adept, and errors sort of jump out at me. I also may or may not get a teeny thrill when I catch something particularly tricky.

One of my favorite books from 2017 was It Was the Best of Sentences, It Was the Worst of Sentences by June Casagrande. This is, as the subtitle claims, "a writer's guide to crafting killer sentences." The book is practical but filled with good, sarcastic, wicked sass, and that's one of two reasons I loved it. The second reason is that the writing advice is as solid as they come. It covers a lot of ground but never gets boring. Casagrande has a handful of books out there I plan on working my way through, including Grammar Snobs Are Great Big Meanies: A Guide to Language for Fun and Spite. I'm a sucker for a great title.

The New Well-Tempered Sentence: A Punctuation Handbook for the Innocent, the Eager, and the Doomed by Karen Elizabeth Gordon is also a favorite of mine, though not technically one I read in 2017. Again, like Casagrande's book, it's filled with humor while not compromising on solid information. Where else can you find a chapter on serial commas that includes the following example?

She attended the wedding feast in her Buster Brown collar, her water moccasins, her spring-loaded pelvic girdle, and her coiffeur's interpretation of Medusa at the Mardi Gras.

I also own another book by Gordon, The Deluxe Transitive Vampire, which looks promising but which I've not yet gotten through. It is set up as a gothic narrative with a cast of characters that includes a vampire (of course), bat, wolf, pizza chef, mastodon, and more. I don't see any reason why this book shouldn't be a win.

I finally got around to reading Stephen King's On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft, which has been read by probably every writer out there, and a great many non-writers who simply like Stephen King. I didn't know what to expect from this and was almost overwhelmed by how much I enjoyed it. I used to love reading his books when I was in college and then somehow got away from them as life got busy, marriage and kids took over, and my reading tastes shifted. But the autobiographical portion of this one rekindled my desire to read his stuff, and the writing advice portion of it was just so practical and no-nonsense that it made me want to write a book. If you happen to be in the .001% of the population who has not read this gem, I suggest you get your butt to the bookstore.

I'm currently in the middle of Building Great Sentences: How to Write the Kinds of Sentences You Love to Read by Brooks Landon. This one is slow going for me, probably because I've now become spoiled by funny, entertaining writing/editing books like the ones mentioned above. However, I'm persevering through this one, because it's actually good. It's just not entertaining, which doesn't diminish the kind of writing advice it includes. At first, I found it ironic that the subtitle talked about the kind of sentences I "love to read" but the sentences I was reading in it were not as lovable as I'd expected. I don't agree with 100% of his advice, because he seems to be a lover of longer sentences, and I imagine his more devoted followers might lean toward purple prose if given the opportunity. However, I have to admit the sometimes-tedious detail he goes into when deconstructing sentences for analysis is helpful when all is said and done. He even says, at the end of an exercise on page 93, "We do not actually think like this when we write! This is a highly artificial and arbitrary exercise, but there is no better way to internalize the various logic patterns available to the writer who knows how cumulative sentences work." So let me say that I do recommend this one, but know what you're in for when you pick it up.

I've shared some of my favorites with you in this post. Part 2 will be focused on your favorites, and the books I've seen recommended over and over again in writer and editor groups. So if you would, please drop me a line at lyndadietz4@gmail.com and tell me what your favorite writing books are, and why. I'll gladly include them.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year, everyone!

It seems that January is the most common time of year to set ourselves up with a list of intentions that are supposed to make us better people. One of the podcasts from Writers After Dark tackled this very topic, and they did such a great job of it that I'm going to send you there if you click on this link. As they put it, "Why does the 'new you' have to come right after the 'old you' just enjoyed a few weeks of absolute decadence?"

[Hey, and while you're over there, if you really, REALLY want to start your New Year right—and I think you do—listen to my own podcast interview and get your first dose of editing inspiration for 2018. The three of us have a great time and actually discuss real things that might help you!]

Even so, I find myself each year with list in hand, breaking down into categories that which is my life, and trying to figure out how to make it better for me and those around me. One of my categories is professional growth, and a subcategory of that is education. I am of the opinion that the more I learn, the more I realize I still have a lot more to learn. This past year, I had some sort-of goals that got completely derailed for a while and then back on track when I received some incredibly useful advice from S.K. Anthony: "Let's just start 2017 over again. So what if it's June?"

And we did.

Over the past few years, I'd had to put much of my business on hold due to the intensity of my day job. As a result, what little time I had left for editing didn't leave any room for growth, and I found myself narrowed down to a handful of clients I scheduled around everything else. In fact, I'd had potential clients walk away because I couldn't fit them in quickly enough, and that was discouraging, to say the least.

When I rebooted 2017, I sat down and thought about my business goals and how I'd allowed myself to lose sight of them. Obviously, the lack of a plan—and pantsing it from week to week—was not working. So I started writing, and came up with a list of things I wanted to accomplish, and whaddya know, I've even gotten to most of them.

I have continued to blog regularly, both here and at my personal blog, and have met and interacted with a whole host of new acquaintances across the globe. Yes, it's time-consuming stuff, blogging, but I love learning more about the world through one-on-one interactions with people I wouldn't have run into otherwise.

I started loading my stuff onto Pinterest with regularity. I have to admit that I don't allow myself to browse Pinterest all that often because (for me, anyway) it is a black hole that sucks away hours of my life without me even realizing it. But I look at it as one more avenue to share my work for those who may or may not ever find my blogs or my IG account.

I started an Instagram account for my business, rather than trying to shove a bunch of business-y things on my personal account. That has proven to be a load of fun, and I've found some new authors to read. Instagram is where I share my fun stuff, where I run promotions like this, and where I can explore, two minutes at a time.

I got some new clients, I joined the Editorial Freelancers Association, became an active participant on a few editors' groups on Facebook, and got off my butt to make my own ERE Facebook page active and growing. Growth is slow, but it's genuine, with people who actually read and engage with my posts there.

Just in time for the end of the year, I had my branding redone by Rachel at Imaginary Beast, and I couldn't be happier. The new look is great, and now I finally have continuity across all my social media. It's professional with just a bit of quirk, like me.

I think the restart midyear was a good move overall. Thank you, S.K.!

What about you? Did you meet your goals? Did you get off track? Did you slam it out of the park? In my next post, I'll be discussing one of my sort-of goals from last year and reviewing the books that helped me achieve it. See you then!

Editor's Notes #39: When the Red Ink Flows

With the love/hate relationship so many authors have with the editorial process, it's tough to do a good job without having someone's feelings hurt on occasion.

When I edit, I tend to leave a lot of margin notes, because it's often the only way I get to converse with the author, other than email. Margin notes allow me to talk where I want to, when the situation arises that I need to.

My margin notes can be for grammar rules, suggestions for a change, and explanations of why I removed something over there and kept it over here. I also use the margin to tell the author if a passage made me laugh or cry, because I think authors need to know their humor actually hits the spot they're aiming for, or if I felt them bleed their emotions onto the page.

After one of my authors told me he'd rather see less red, I changed my settings in Word so that anything I delete is in a nice, soothing blue, a.k.a. "Perhaps you may wish to rethink this." Anything I add is in red, a.k.a. "Do what I say because I know better in this instance."

Hmm. Maybe it's not exactly that way, but at least there is less red on the page, right? Goal achieved.

However, what happens when there's so much red on the page that every new comment feels like "the" comment? This is the one that's going to break him. This is the one that will put her over the edge. It's just too much.

I've had this happen on occasion, and I always feel terrible about it. But when all is said and done, I can't do less than the job I was hired to do, and if that means a lot of red, then that's what the manuscript needs. I try to be concise in my explanations, but I'm never sure how that goes over, since every time I think I'm being factual and neutral, my kids tell me I sound mean.

Not nearly as mean as some, apparently. I saw a Twitter post the other day, asking for authors to share the meanest thing someone ever told them about their writing. The "ouch"-worthy one that stood out to me was someone who said his editor asked him if he purposely wrote that way to make people think he was stupid.

Wow.

Believe me, the goal is never to sound mean. In fact, if I've gone through a frustrating edit, I tend to wait a day or two before sending them off (barring any deadline issues), reread all my margin notes, "nice" them up a bit if needed, and then proceed with returning the MS.

What's the best way to deal with a lot of red ink? I have to admit that I still don't really know. All I can do is keep doing the job, explaining as I go, and hope the writer accepts that the changes are necessary if the book is to become its best.

So, authors, tell me about your experiences with editors. Have you had someone treat your manuscript as if it's their own, rewriting things the way they'd say them? Have you had an editor that made you feel inept? Or have your red-ink moments been a positive thing for you?

Please Don't Ask Me to Read Your Book

I'm an editor for indie authors. As such, I recognize how difficult it is for some of them to get book reviews on Amazon and Goodreads, so I'm careful to always leave a review when I read a book. If it's great, of course I want others to enjoy it, and if it's terrible, I want to warn people to save their money and time.

Most of my reviews tend to be favorable because I have a general idea of what I'm picking up before I start, either from friends' recommendations or my own pre-purchase research. Even if a book is cheapie-cheap, I'll still read the negative reviews to see if they mention anything that's important to me. I don't usually bother reading very many positive reviews, partly because so many reviewers include spoilers without realizing it, and partly because I expect a book to be good. If someone thinks it's not good, I want to know why.

People on Goodreads ask for reviewers all the time. This is a dubious practice, and "officially" there is to be no review swapping (because those boil down to give-me-five-stars-and-I'll-give-you-five-stars) but still . . . authors are constantly pimping a free e-copy if someone—anyone!—will pleasepleasepleaseprettyplease review their book. (Author Gisela Hausmann has a great post, "What Authors Can Learn from Car Salesmen," that gives some great tips on how to not beg/sound desperate.)

So when people ask for reviews on GR . . . if I haven't offered (and I'm obviously very active there) then I am not interested. Why am I not interested? After all, I do love reading and I always review what I read.

Well, in a few words, here's why. By asking me to review your book, you are putting me in the position of either looking like a jerk by saying no because I:

1. don't have time 
2. saw the reviews and know I won't enjoy it 
3. know from experience that most who ask on random forums have books with numerous issues, and I will be put into the uncomfortable position of saying it out loud

Or I say yes to be polite and then am forced—because I won't say yes and then not do it—to read and pay attention to details I might otherwise not. It's weird . . . I naturally remember details of books I've chosen to read, but have to concentrate on books not of my own choosing. Perhaps it comes from the occasional assigned reading at my day job, where we are expected to discuss what we've read. If I have to read a book someone's asked me to read, I read it as an editor, and can't shut that off. This is an odd curse, but that's what I deal with.

Dear stranger, basically you are asking me to work for you without being paid for it, and I have wasted a lot of time and energy doing things like this that I later regret. As a freelancer, I do a fair number of free evaluations for writers, and if they hire me, that's great, but if they don't, it's hours put in that don't pay off. It happens, and it's part of the free eval package.

Those ones I don't mind nearly as much, except for these stats—the ones who don't hire me are typically broken down into these portions: 10% are people who simply choose someone else—a better fit, for example, of a British editor for a UK writer, or those who are truly shopping around and looking for the best price, fit, and timing on the calendar—and the other 90% are people whose manuscripts are nowhere near ready for editing, much less publishing.

Those 90% still get the same thorough editing eval as anyone else, because I believe in being fair, and I want to be as thorough in my explanation as possible when I'm telling someone their book is not ready for editing. Perhaps I could be mean about it and simply tell them it's not ready, but if they don't know why, then it may never be ready. Or they'll find an unscrupulous editor who will take their money, fix misspellings and typos, and never tell them how bad the overall writing actually is.

Unfortunately, in my experience, many of the "read my book for review" people are still in the second-draft phase and don't know it because they've already gone and published. So yes, I'm being asked do work for them for free, even if they're not aware of it. I even added a (hopefully polite) "please don't ask me to read your book" portion to my Goodreads profile, because I get a slow-but-steady flow of requests that wax and wane around the timing of my posted reviews, and I always feel so uncomfortable when answering. I hate to be rude, but on the other hand, they're not exactly being polite by asking a stranger to do them a favor when there's been no previous relationship.

What are your thoughts on the "please read my book" crowd? I'm not looking for everyone to necessarily agree with me, but would genuinely enjoy your input on this one.

*****

If you like what you're reading, I invite you to fill out the "Follow by Email" widget in the column on the right. You'll get my amazing insights right in your inbox! How thrilling is that? Or you can follow me on Instagram (as easyreaderediting) for completely different content—check out all that stuff on the upper right of my page where the Instagram feed is scrolling merrily along. I also have an Easy Reader Editing Facebook page I'd love for you to like and follow. I'm on Google+ as myself (Lynda Dietz) and my "follow" badge is . . . you guessed it, right there in the right-hand column for you to click. I try to share different things in each place so  life doesn't get predictable and boring, and you never know what you'll find—or whether I'll be sharing YOUR posts, too.

"Sticker Shock" and the Cost of Edits

Put a group of editors and authors together on any online forum, and not only will you get five helpful suggestions for every three people involved, you'll get a large number of opinions on editing, what it means, and of course the dreaded C-O-S-T.

I recently joined a group called Ask A Book Editor, and have enjoyed the interactions and information exchange. Self-promotion is strictly forbidden, so it's simple Q&A with authors and other editors. Someone recently asked about free evaluations, cost per hour v. cost per word, and costs in general.

After participating in a lively discussion of "if you charge X, you're not charging enough," I thought I'd check out the Excel file that lists all the editors who are part of the site so I could explore some of these people and their pricing structure—just to see where I landed on the spectrum.

And . . . wow. I'm a cheap date.

I knew from talking with authors I've worked with that I charge about half of what many freelancers do. In fact, when I started working with Raymond Esposito, he said he'd paid exactly twice as much with another editing house before working with me—and I ended up re-editing the two books that other business had worked on. But what an eye-opener to see what some of these people rake in! My cost per word is, at best, half of that charged by others . . . but in the majority of situations I found that these people were charging three times what I do, sometimes with an hourly rate added on. One editor quoted rates "starting at .018 per word plus $45/hour," which sounded outlandish to me. And yet, these people are all working steadily.

Funny thing: there were those who were almost pricing snobs. Their opinion was that editors who charged x amount (actually, what I charge, though I was a little embarrassed to admit it to them) were either incompetent or trying to undercut the competition. I am neither. I like to think of myself as realistic with what the average indie author can afford and is willing to spend. I've given what I think is a reasonable estimate after a free evaluation, complete with discount, and have had people say, "Oh, I had no idea it would cost that much, to be honest."

What do I say to that? "Um, did you look at anyone's prices prior to contacting them directly?" comes to mind, even if it sounds incredibly snarky. Because if it were me, and I looked at someone's site to get their contact information, I would check out the pricing, calculate what my particular MS would cost, and then shop around to come up with three to five editors of varying rates for evaluation. The cheapest estimate is not always the lowest quality; nor does a higher rate guarantee better quality. In general terms, these things may hold truth, but the work itself needs to be considered.

In another online group, an author was looking for an editor, and many people in the group mentioned Reedsy. One author said it was "expensive but worth it" and when asked about cost, she mentioned about $2,000 for a typical-length novel. I can understand that for developmental editing, but for copy editing & proofreading (the type she was quoting), I can tell you that most indie authors can not afford that—nor will they pay it. They'll either go cheap and hope for the best, or they'll publish without professional edits and will continue to promote the stereotype of self-pubs putting out subpar work. This is why I offer more affordable pricing with options. I hate the idea that talented work is out there, unedited. In all other aspects of life, we manage to find the money and time for things that are important to us—and yet when it comes to editing a novel into which you've put your time, sweat, imagination, and future writing reputation, there's an attitude of "It's more than I want to pay, so it's okay to go without this step."

I can't compete with Reedsy, and thankfully I don't have to. The authors I've worked with are determined to put forth the best product they possibly can, and I help them to do so. Is a big name like Reedsy worth it? I don't know, since I'd have to compare their work side by side to my own. I do know the editors I've spoken with (who have been approached by Reedsy) say they prefer to work as freelancers because Reedsy doesn't pay well. One guy posted a status update last night, saying, "That time when you took a low-paying job with a big publishing house, hoping it would lead to bigger, better jobs . . . and six months later, I got another from them, at half the rate they paid last time. Never again. I much prefer working with the author directly."

It makes me wonder if, when all is said and done, their [Reedsy's] editors—and perhaps those employed by other large editing/publishing houses—aren't making a whole lot more than I am. Except in this case, the author is paying the difference.

Read that last sentence again. If we're making about the same, why not cut out the middleman—the one who isn't doing the work—and pay the freelancer directly? I may be biased, but it sure seems more cost-effective to me.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And now a shameless plug from our sponsor: 

For the month of October, I'm running a special on editing packages for 2018, and it's pretty doggone good, so you may wish to check it out on my "Special Offers" tab. Plus you get to see a kickin' photo of an old, happy guy playing the accordion with one hand while holding a large mug of beer in the other. (Yeah, that'll get you running over there . . .)

Editor's Notes #38: Dialogue Part 3—Those @#$!$%^ Tags

This is the third and final part in my series on dialogue. Click HERE to read Part One—Regional Overkill, and click HERE to read Part Two—Sounding Real.

Book after book has been written about them. Blog after blog has featured articles with cautionary tales. And yet . . . the overly awkward dialogue tag still manages to work its way out of the garbage can and into manuscripts the world over.

In fact, while researching for this post, I was astounded at the number of articles I found which advocated "the death of 'Said'" and "making your dialogue more interesting with anything but 'said'" and other generally bad advice.

I'm not saying there's never a good moment for a shout here and there, but the advice to young writers on various teaching blogs & forums goes directly against the advice of best-selling authors, who sometimes advise to skip tags altogether as often as possible, and more often suggest "said" or "asked" as a way of making the tag disappear.

Personally, I tend to skim over dialogue tags when I'm reading, so I like the idea of eliminating them more often than not, unless the conversation becomes confusing. Maybe it's because I read decent books that use "said" and "asked" and, as promised by those high-level authors, those two particular words become invisible after a little while.

No one wants to read the old-fashioned (and thankfully, almost never used) "he ejaculated" as a dialogue tag. The more obscure tags will pull a reader from the story as physically as tipping him out of his chair. Think of how often you've read "blustered," "queried," "wailed," "bellowed," "quipped," and the like. I don't know about you, but when I read those words, in my mind the character is instantly replaced by the Skipper from Gilligan's Island, a blusterer & bellower from way back. Or suddenly the character is Lucille Ball, wailing her trademark waaahhh.

Elimination of dialogue tags in certain spots can be effective for quick back-and-forth action. If your characters are written distinctly, their manner of speech should indicate easily enough who's talking.

Another mistake inexperienced writers often make is to use dialogue tags that don't work in the physical world:

• "I love you," she breathed. Nope. You can't breathe in while speaking. And breathing out is not the same as forcing air through your mostly closed vocal cords.
• "Don't do that," he growled. Nope again. Try growling and saying anything intelligible. You're not Batman.
• "Get over here, NOW," she hissed. Double nope. Hissing and speaking don't mix, and hissing sounds usually require the use of the letter "s." Just ask Harry Potter.
• "What do you mean, you won't?" he barked. Nooooope. Unless it's a dog literally barking, and you understand that he sounds like arf arf woof woof grrr but you can translate it in your head like a foreign language, or—oh, forget it. You get my point.

So . . . to recap these three posts neatly: don't overuse regional dialect and slang, make sure your characters sound as real as the people around you, and make those dialogue tags disappear, whether literally or figuratively.

I'd love to know: Have you ever read a truly abominable dialogue tag? Have you written one you regret (or that your editor made you regret until you removed it)?

Editor's Notes #35: Edits Is Important

One of the editors I follow on Twitter posted a thought last week, and I instantly felt a kinship. She stated that she could not count how many books she'd edited after they'd already been published. I have done this a number of times, and for a number of reasons. Her comment ended with "Don't make this same mistake!"

Someone replied to her tweet with, "Why is this a mistake?" I think he thought she was saying it was a mistake to get a book edited after publishing, whereas I am 99.99% sure she was cautioning against publishing before proper editing. Tiny detail, but important. It is NEVER too late to get a book properly edited if you plan on writing more books. As the post title states (or should state), edits are important.

As an editor, I feel it's important to see what other editors are up to, so I follow a number of editing blogs and editors on the various social media outlets. There's so much information (and misinformation) out there that I figure by following them, I can only increase my chances of learning something I may not have found on my own—or without hours of extensive research. After all, I realize there are people who read my Editor's Notes who are astounded at what I've come up with, because it's the first time they've ever heard this stuff. Nouns? Verbs? What? She's a genius!

Work with me here, people. I can dream.

There are also those (probably the majority) who already know 90% of what I have to share. They most likely do what I do: you read the stuff you already know and consider it another mental nail to hold your knowledge in place on that particular subject. Repetition is great, and I'm always thrilled to not have to look something up because I've used that particular rule from the Chicago Manual so many times that "it's in there."

So why are edits (prior to publishing) important? I have worked with and spoken with a number of authors who have experienced the following (and I will use "him" as my pronoun here, though some are men and some are women):

• Wrote a book, had someone close to him read it, published it. Got bad reviews due to lack of editing. Hired an editor and republished. Didn't realize the editor was a hack, got more bad reviews. Hired a better editor and got the book fixed but found it almost impossible to get anyone to reread the corrected version because they'd already given up on that author, due to so many other books out there to sift through. Lost all the oomph and has had a hard time wanting to continue writing. Enough years have passed now that a fan base will have to be built from scratch all over again, should the writing ever recommence. 
• Wrote a book, ran the book portions through an online editing "help" service which helped a little but did not substitute fully for a real, live editor. Lack of edits was pointed out, he hired an editor, book quality and fan base improved.
• Wrote a book, hired an expensive editing house to edit book. As much was missed as was caught in a fairly clean copy to begin with, but enough had been overlooked that he hired a new editor for half the price and twice the trustworthiness.
• Wrote a book, published it. Realized an editor was needed and hired one. Editor was so-so but not horrible. Still, enough problems remained to prompt the hiring of another editor to proof. Book is cleaned up and shiny, ready to go.
• Wrote a book, hired an editor who turned out to be a hack. Same hack as the first example I listed, in fact. Realized after getting the edited MS back that the editor had actually made the book worse, and hired another editor, who "edited" many things back to their formerly correct selves and polished up the remainder. Book cleaned up prior to ever publishing, well received, won two awards.
• Wrote a book, published without an editor. Wrote another book, tried to hire an editor but did not want to make the changes suggested, so second book was also published without edits. Both books on Amazon have almost no reviews, and those only from admitted family and friends. I'm assuming the sales are in tandem with the number of reviews.

In some instances above, the writers didn't think they needed edits. In other cases, they truly thought they were doing the right thing by hiring someone who didn't come through. All cases mentioned (and there are many more) highlight the fact that editing is essential, and that it's not always possible to make a good impression after making a bad one. In some of the cases above, the writing was so impressive that people were willing to reread an edited version and subsequent books. In a few other sad cases, that was not the happy ending.

When in doubt, listen to those around you. Get some beta readers. Get some ARC (advance reader copy) readers. Research editors and get free sample evals. It's not just about subject/verb agreement. It's all about making sure that what seems "good enough" is actually correct.

Editor's Notes #32: Inner Dialogue & How to Punctuate Thoughts

Punctuating dialogue has so many rules, depending on whether there are dialogue tags, split sentences, spoken words, or internal thoughts. Most of the rules are hard and fast, but there can be a little bit of flexibility when necessary.

As with any guidelines that allow for exceptions, the key is to be consistent. There's nothing more confusing than a lack of consistency, and nothing that will turn your readers off more quickly by pulling them out of a story.

My partner in crime, S.K. Anthony, covered all the how-tos of punctuating spoken dialogue in her article "How to Correctly Punctuate Dialogue for Novels" (aptly named, eh?), so if you'd like to know how to . . . um . . . correctly punctuate dialogue for novels . . . then pop over to Writers After Dark and read all about it. As for me, I'm going to tell you what to do if the dialogue is all in your character's head.

So here are the basics, and the POV you're writing from can help you decide which is best for you with relative ease:

Most people will write a character's thoughts in italics, either with or without a dialogue tag. It makes sense because the italics set off a visual cue in the reader's mind that we're hearing thoughts, not spoken words. The sample using omniscient POV uses a dialogue tag, since the reader needs to know who's doing the thinking, and the omniscient point of view gives you a little bit of everyone while keeping the author as the dominant voice.

I don't understand, Lynda thought as she looked around the kitchen in a panic. Why would Kat have eaten all my brownies without telling me? And to think I was going to surprise her with them for breakfast! 

Kat walked in, empty coffee cup in hand. "Heyyy, 'sup? Any of those brownies left for breakfast?"

You don't need the dialogue tag for regular third-person POV, since it will be clear who's speaking and whose thoughts are happening.

"G'morning." Kat yawned, holding out an empty coffee cup and glancing around the kitchen. "Any brownies left? I couldn't stop thinking about them last night."

Like you don't know. Unless you're a sleepwalker . . . and a sleep-eater. "Well, I was going to ask you the same thing." 

You could also do this exact exchange with no italics, and it would still be clear because of the POV. All it needs are a few tweaks in the verb tense.

"G'morning." Kat yawned, holding out an empty coffee cup and glancing around the kitchen. "Any brownies left? I couldn't stop thinking about them last night."

Lynda looked as baffled as she felt. Like Kat didn't know. Unless she was a sleepwalker . . . and a sleep-eater. "Well, I was going to ask you the same thing." 

There's an additional complication, though, in certain instances when characters communicate telepathically. In Alex Cavanaugh's CassaSeries (CassaDawn, CassaStar, CassaFire, CassaStorm) the Cassans have the ability to communicate this way. Cavanaugh does a nice job of differentiating the types of thoughts. If a character is simply in his own head, then there are no italics or dialogue tags. If two characters are sharing thoughts with each other, italics come into play.

Two important things to remember:

1. NEVER use quotation marks for internal dialogue of any type. They're reserved exclusively for spoken words and will only confuse the reader if you add them anywhere else.
2. Be consistent, whether you're using italics with a tag, italics without a tag, no italics and no tag, or a mixture as in the book series mentioned above.

So what do you think, folks? Did you learn anything today? Did you already know it? It's entirely possible that you just don't care, because you're never going to use ANY dialogue in your book—and I would love to read a book that used only clicks, grunts, shrugs, eyebrow raises and elbow nudges to communicate, don't get me wrong—but I doubt any of you currently have that as your WIP. 

I hope.

Do I Have to Love a Genre to Edit It?

As a reader, I can choose whatever book strikes my fancy, and if I don't like it once I've gotten part way into it, I can simply stop reading it.

As an editor, the "put it down" option is nowhere to be found. If I take on a job, I finish it. That's what I'm hired to do. So there's the question: Do I have to love a genre to edit it?

The answer is a big fat NOPE.

I've edited a decent number of books from a decent number of authors, and it goes without saying that those authors don't all write at the same level of skill. If a book isn't ready for edits (major issues), then that's one thing, but if a book is ready and I take on the job, it's now a matter of accepting that the writing level is either good or waaay good. Genre really doesn't factor in.

[I should clarify: genre is only a factor if someone asks me to edit erotica. I'm no prude, but I don't think editing erotica is compatible with my job as assistant to the worship leader at a large church. Call me crazy if you must, but I'm pretty sure I'm right.]

Anyway, I've found that, regardless of my typical reading preferences, the genre of a book I'm editing doesn't matter in the big scheme of things. I've been pleasantly surprised at how much I've enjoyed certain books I wouldn't think to pick up for pleasure reading. Now that my kids are no longer of the age where I sit down to read to them—and we did read aloud to them well into their teen years as a nighttime thing so we could all enjoy a good book at the same time—I rarely pick up juvenile fiction, or even young adult fiction, and yet I enjoy editing those books when they come my way. Part of it is, I think, that it reminds me of how much discovery is out there for kids who read, and part of it is that I've just worked with good writers who tell an entertaining story.

The one thing I have to be cautious about (and I don't think I actually do this, but it's always good to be alert) is to not change an author's voice while editing something I'm not really enjoying. A few years ago, I agreed to read/review a novel for someone who approached me through Goodreads. I was between edits at the time and thought it would be nice to do a new author a favor. The book was science fiction, which I love, so I thought it would be enjoyable.

Silly me. The book was not enjoyable. It was a confusing read, because it was full of time travel and the dialogue was written in the present and future tense at the same time . . . and it took me a long time to get into the flow of it enough to read without constantly rereading. It also pushed an agenda, which I do NOT like in works of fiction, even when it's a viewpoint I might agree with. It was super lengthy, too, and was only the first part in a ten-part series, from what I gathered.

The bottom line: even though I was beta/review-reading this and not really editing per se, I had to be careful to not let my (lack of) enjoyment cloud my judgment of whether the book was ready to publish. The book was written skillfully, and the author did a heck of a job self-editing (which I would never recommend to anyone as a general rule). Though there were many things I would have wanted to change, it was just fine the way it was. I felt like a huge success just by being able to give a neutral opinion when I did my report. I told the author of my struggles with it, but she actually loved my review and thanked me for separating my reading tastes from the quality of the writing.

It may be difficult, but editing should not be a matter of opinion. I try to think of it like a doctor thinks of his/her patients. Wouldn't you always want to deal with the pleasant people who are fit and attractive? Or be the dentist whose patients all have great teeth?

Editing is like that in many ways. The manuscript is the sum of its parts, and it's my job to make sure all the parts are in the condition they're supposed to be in so the whole is at its best. It's not my job to judge whether the parts are attractive to me personally, because those same parts, when put together as a whole, will be attractive to someone else.

What You May Have Missed . . . the Odd Stuff

This post follows up on the last one, with the flip side of what I've been up to in my own little editing world.

I've had some odd experiences over the past couple years when editing for people, and I sort of file those under the "huh" category and move along, not knowing whether I'll hear from them again or not, for whatever reason on my end or theirs.

I receive editing requests on a regular basis (that's the goal, after all), and I've learned to not get excited about them until I research a bit more. I've had dozens of instances of "I FOUND YOUR SITE AND I LOVE IT AND I HAVE A BOOK THAT NEEDS EDITED CAN YOU HELP ME I'VE ATTACHED MY FIRST THREE CHAPTERS FOR YOU TO EVALUATE!"

My standard response? I reply with some questions, such as:

• What is the genre and length of your novel?
• What is your expected publishing date and how long do you anticipate the edits to take?
• Have you been in contact with other editors for evaluations?
• Has anyone other than you read through your manuscript for beta purposes?
• How did you find me and have you read through my terms and pricing? 

I don't think these are unreasonable questions. They're pretty basic, in fact. And yet, I'm never surprised when 90% of those people don't reply. My guess is that there are people out there who submit a different set of chapters to a variety of editors for a free eval, with the intent to work the system and eventually get all their chapters edited for free. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but a realist with human nature when strangers deal with each other for business purposes.

Still, there are the 10% who are serious about needing an editor; some have become friends, some are merely friendly business acquaintances who contact me when they need me, and others simply puzzle me. 

One author I worked with contracted me for a novel that had been subject to what I call "backward publishing"—when the book gets released for sale in the hopes that it will generate enough income to get it edited later. When the author approached me, it was stated that there would be "a second book, probably following within a month, because I just need to get this done." That was fine by me. The author was pleasant, the writing was decent, and of course I was happy to have the work lined up back in the earlier days. I did the first book, sent it back, the author was pleased, and I asked to be notified when it was updated on Amazon so I could promo it. The author replied two weeks later, saying things had gotten really busy with regular life (they own a family business) and that the book would be uploaded when there was time. I never received a notification that the book was updated. I've looked on Amazon a few times and have never seen my name or ERE listed with editing credits, though there are many other acknowledgements listed in the front matter of the "look inside" feature. In reading the first chapter, it seems as if my edits are there (mostly because I remembered there were a lot of punctuation issues in the original and now they're gone) but the lack of any follow-through bothers me. As you may have guessed, there was no second book and no reference to the fact that the time had been booked for it. By then, I was busy enough that I didn't press the issue, but it was a curious event nonetheless. A lot of hours go into what I do, and having my name or the business name in the list of credits is how I can prove I've done the work I claim to have done. And if an author isn't happy with my work, or found someone more affordable, I will never know it (or why) if there's no followup. [Side note for this particular author: just before publishing this post, I did notice there is a second book now published in the series I worked on, and an editor was thanked—though not by name (what??)—which makes me wonder if there was something I did wrong or if a friend offered to edit for free. I need to know these things. Curiosity kills me.]

Thankfully, most people aren't like that, and I've only had one hostile person who would not take advice (and who I ended up declining to work with when all was said and done). I hear from some authors more frequently than others, because everyone writes at a different pace, some penning four books in the time it takes another to write one. I've met some interesting people in the process, whether they ended up working with me or someone else, and I have to admit that I enjoy being surprised by the high-quality creativity some people have bubbling in their brains. 

And I still get a thrill when someone comes back as a repeat client, because ultimately, that speaks volumes over a pleasant email "thank you" any day.

Editor's Notes #18 : Does Your Editor Go the Extra Mile?

I'm sure each of us has been the recipient of the phrase, "It's not what you said, it's how you said it!" when we've inadvertently offended someone. I would be willing to bet there's not a person on this earth who hasn't said the right thing in the wrong way at least once. Heck, I do it all the time, so I probably skew the statistics a bit for everyone else. 

Is tact really an art form, or can any ol' schmo learn it? I do think some people are naturally more tactful than others, but I think a small helping of tact can smooth over a plethora of situations. In our family, we have the two ends of the scale, right under one roof. Lucky us, right? Hmm. Well, on one hand there's me:

PERSON: Would you like to come over on Saturday? We're having a picnic with a bunch of people you don't know and probably won't ever see again, but you're always good for a fun time.

ME: [I'm tired and do NOT want to go but can't lie about it, either.] Well, I have a lot going on this week, and Saturday's the only day I can catch up with my family, so I'll have to bow out this time. But thanks for inviting me! That was really sweet of you.

And there's my husband:

PERSON: Would you like to come over on Saturday? We're having—

HUBBY: No.

The man does have it in him to be tactful when necessary, like when I say, "How does this look?" and he replies, "Well . . . I know you really like that outfit and it doesn't look bad, but it's not the most flattering thing you own." More often than not, he prefers to be blunt. Because he never does it with the intention of being hurtful, people who know him appreciate that they'll always get an honest answer.

I associate honesty with caring. If I care about you, I'll tell you if you've hurt my feelings. I may wait a bit so as not to react in knee-jerk fashion, but I need to the relationship to be healthy and therefore won't let it fester. It may not always be the comfortable thing to say, but I'll put it out there and if the other person also cares, the issue will get fixed.

How does this relate to editing, you may ask? Let's put it into the proper context. I get paid to do the job of a copy editor. I can correct typos, fix those tricky semicolons, and correct your homophone use. I can do the bare minimum required. I sends da bill, I gets da money. Fair and square.

But what if the manuscript needs more than what my job description entails? Furthermore, what if I know what needs fixed and have suggestions on how things can be made better? Am I obligated to tell the author these things? No.

But . . .

My personal standards don't allow me to skip that step. If I care, then I am, indeed, obligated to say something. Sometimes the improvements are light, easy fixes, and other times, a whole lot of work is involved.

Perhaps this word might work more effectively here than the one you've used sounds a whole lot nicer than Do you even know what this word means? The first suggestion implies there's a better option out there and it may improve the book to use that option. The second implies that the writer is a moron who deserves to be charged double.

This is not to say it's kinder to only say easy things. There are times that hard truths need to be said, and saying them kindly doesn't mask the fact that they may still be hard to hear. If someone truly wants to improve his work, he'll at least ponder those truths and confirm them with others. If ego takes over, the truths will be stubbornly ignored, and the work may never improve. 

It's my hope that those I work with will always see my comments and suggestions as stemming from a desire to see the book at its best. I would rather tell the truth than stroke the ego any day of the week.