Almost every author I know, and a lot more that I read, remark in their acknowledgements that they are so very grateful for their editor for making their opus so much better. It’s kind and generous of them to say so.
But I think they are lying. Or if not lying, exactly, they say it grudgingly, through clenched teeth.
I’m not sure what editors think of their role on the production of a book. Glad to be of help? Superior? Just as stressed as the author?
It’s not an easy thing to give feedback and suggest ‘improvements’ without straining the relationship. Harder still to accept those suggested inputs gracefully, without rancour, resentment, even if it is needed.

There are two kinds of writers, of course: good ones and bad. (Well, in reality, there is a spectrum from good to bad and many degrees of mediocre in between; but never mind that now, we’re building a case here.)
And there are two other categories of writers: those who welcome feedback on their work, and those who don’t.
This leads to a 2×2 matrix:

Naïf, doesn’t mean the writer is shallow or ignorant, though it might include that, it really means innocent. Naïfs don’t know whether their writing is good or poor, or whether their story idea is empty and common, or novel and entertaining. Either way they need honest and constructive feedback: encouragement to keep on revising, or the advice to give it up.

A Fool and his money are soon parted and this maxim certainly applies to the poor writer who resists feedback, for the Fool may spend loads of money on cover design, production costs, advertising and entry fees, and get no buyers.

The Wise author may not realise he’s good (but probably suspects it) and seeks editorial review because he genuinely wants another opinion on his manuscript from an experienced editor/reviewer who can add value to his opus. He swallows his pride and seeks the help and revises his manuscript accordingly. He may even get a flattering blurb for the back cover of his book.

Stubborn is an adjective and it probably would go well as a moderator of Fool, hence this quadrant might better be labelled idiot. For what does it cost but silly pride to seek constructive feedback from a credible source.

(You’ll note that I used the third person masculine pronoun in describing these type-casts because, for me, the Fowler follower, this is correct usage to denote a generic gender: I’ll not truck with the current clumsy third person plural ‘they’ or ‘them’ or ‘their’ to denote neutral. Besides, I’m not sure whether female, or even gender obtuse, authors ever resist seeking feedback.)

I’m sure you, my faithful reader, wishes to know which quadrant of my matrix I (He/Him for any of you in doubt) fall into. If you guessed Stubborn you might be right. (I do think idiot a bit strong, though it’s true I have never covered my production and marketing costs in trying to sell my books.) I admit to having enough hubris to think my writing is good, economic, accurate, ironic, fluid, readable: entertaining, if not educational. Why would I want feedback only to have my deepest fears confirmed. At reviewer might be entitled to her opinion but she might be wrong. I’ve had enough approbation from my devoted readers to feel both affirmation of my writing and encouragement to write more. As for the rest, I can think of dozens of reason why they missed the point.

So I resist getting an editor to review my manuscripts. I get beta readers instead. I select beta readers who are likely to be positive but also diplomatic in giving me suggestions for improvement. By the time my beta readers have their hands on my manuscript (fully formatted and in book-sized advance copy) I’ve reviewed it and revised it many times over. I live with the maxim, Fourth Draft (after the book by John McPhee, Draft #4, On the Writing Process) thinking that, as a ‘good writer’, four is enough. And truth be told, those drafts have been edited multiple times before they ever get into beta readers’ hands. I don’t much worry about typing errors – MSWord finds most of them (of which there are many) – but I do look for awkward sentences, illogical statements, structural problems, and the like.

And despite me instructing my beta readers not to labour over typing errors (they are not line editors), they seem to find plenty. What I’m really asking for is whether the story itself is worthwhile, with suitable logic to the plot, good flow, good character development and consistency. If they suggest something that I agree with that improves the work, I take that into account in the fifth draft; if not, I ignore – thank profusely, but ignore.

I think that’s what most writers do, at least to some degree. After all, it’s their project, not something to be hijacked by some jumped up English major!

And there’s the rub. The author pours a lot of energy, effort, time and ‘soul’ into the creation of his or her book; to put it in the hands of someone else to care for and foster means the final product is not the author’s alone and some part of him is lost, even if the final product is better than the original. It’s a dilemma.

To be an author takes a load of courage, or maybe its unadmitted hubris. Authors, well maybe not all authors, believe in themselves; they have to. They have a story to tell, and a belief they have the skills to tell it, well. (Well, not always.) Deep down though, or maybe close to the surface, they have doubt, lots of doubt. They worry that they don’t have the talent, and they fear that some reviewer will confirm that fear; others hope for affirmation, if not approbation.

In either case, to expose one’s work to an editor takes courage. To give up one’s creation – one’s baby – to someone else to ‘improve’, is very hard on the ego, the very self. Is it any wonder authors – Stubborn or otherwise – are reluctant to submit their work to an editor’s review.

Well, maybe most authors don’t harbour those feelings of fear and resentment and genuinely welcome the suggested improvements. Maybe it’s just me who resists editorial review.

But I don’t think so.

Doug Jordan, reporting to you from Kanata
© Douglas Jordan & AFS Publishing. All rights reserved. No part of these blogs and newsletters may be reproduced without the express permission of the author and/or the publisher, except upon payment of a small royalty, 5¢.