Editing fees

My basic fee for editing is $40 per hour. I am not currently GST registered and GST is not applied. Minimum fee for all tasks is one hour, and after that time is charged in quarter-hour increments.

Editing tasks generally combine proofreading tasks. Unlike proofreading alone, I can give no indication of word count versus time until I have examined a few pages of the script and come to an estimate of the likely time involved. Unless we agree otherwise, the fee charged will reflect actual hours spent on the script.

For longer scripts, and especially for works of an artistic nature, I prefer to use an agreed-fee structure. This tends to be better value for the writer and a far more satisfying experience for me personally.

Editing

Editing is the assembling of textual material into good order and quality so as to effectively communicate ideas or information to an audience. A text editor can assist a writer with structure, basic language details such as grammar and syntax, semantic fit and appropriateness, sometimes the law and the value judgements associated with that (like copyright infringements), and the whole kitchen sink business of making a finished product on behalf of or with a writer.

Unless, of course, the writer makes other rules for the editor to follow.

Thinking about what an editor does…

Edit means “to put forth”, which is both useful and not useful in understanding the term.

The original function of an editor was to gather together all elements of, historically, a written work and to check that it was complete and in good order. It was then sent to the copyist or printer, after which it became the responsibility of the author to sell the thing.

In the last four or five centuries a slightly different arrangement became common: publishers – the word means “send out to the people” – emerged, dedicated to making money from the enterprise of spreading ideas. Fair enough: it’s a market economy and a system of sales was important to the spread of knowledge in an increasingly-literate age.

Editors then became specialist employees of publishers, but often very powerful ones. Editors became skilled at knocking the author’s work, and sometimes the authors themselves, into publishable shape on behalf of the publisher. Their ability to take a raw work and refine it for a specific audience willing to pay money for the end product is what kept, and keeps, both publishers and authors afloat in a mercantile world.

The idea of having someone critically look over your writing to ensure its integrity and effectiveness at communicating your ideas pre-dates and survives the commercial world. All students (secondary and tertiary), all bureaucracies (and that includes businesses and, say, government departments) benefit from critical editing of reports, essays, policies and procedures: of any writing expected to be a standard reference. Note that “critical” originates in a Latin word meaning a judge: and judging is one very deliberate function of the editing process. Sometimes it’s an ego-bruising process, too. Judgements often are.

Writer/ editor relationships

There is always a tension between an editor and a writer, especially if their shared purpose isn’t solely and precisely to make money. Dare I mention the word “artist” at this point?

Authors abound who can tell you horror stories of fractious relationships with their editors as they each embed themselves into incompatible positions over a work that the author regards as finished but which an editor thinks is a half-way decent first draft but still misses the point… Conversely, authors who have experienced real nurturing by an editor will speak of a partnership of value and depth.

The relationship between an editor and a writer is important, possibly crucial, to the end product. The boundaries of that relationship need to be uniquely negotiated prior to the editing work beginning and adhered to throughout the whole process. Both parties have to have an understanding of the power of an editor to influence the outcome, and be utterly wary of it. A writer who is able to choose an editor (and not all have that choice) should select one who has strengths that are useful to the writer: editing strengths which allow the writer to produce their best work.

Academic editing

It is never the task of an editor to rewrite or reform the work of a writer.

This is an edict writ in stone when it comes to the editing of academic work, both undergraduate submissions and postgraduate publications. Rules exist which govern the process, and sometimes that comes as a surprise to undergraduates. The winning of a degree or diploma, based as it is upon the reputation of the academic institution, is a process tightly regulated within and between academic institutions. Part of the general standard is a guarantee that the knowledge assessed belongs to the graduate or undergraduate: that it’s their own work.

The competitive nature of modern academia means that many students try to find editors for their work and so improve their rankings.

This is usually not a problem if the editor is in fact one’s academic supervisor, whose job it is to help shape the student’s thesis or essay so that it fairly reflects the best the student can offer. Acknowledgement is usually delivered in the form of a foreword or endnote to the work and there is an implicit guarantee that the supervisor has complied with professional ethics when they assisted the student.

If an external editor (like me) is employed in an academic context, the process becomes a little more complex. Two things have to happen: the editing process must begin early and not impinge upon the final product; and the external editor has to be aware of the limitations imposed upon their interventions. While it’s true to say that an editor has a relatively free hand to assist with matters of style, presentation, grammar and other semantic housekeeping, the editor must maintain a hands-off stance in matters of interpretation and content.

Employing an external editor who is unaware of this or who, being unaware of this, has specialist knowledge of the work in preparation can lead to absolute disaster. Is the work still your own? Tertiary learning institutions have used anti-plagiarism software for some time, with varied success. Of more effect is the gut feeling produced in a tutor or supervisor that the presented work is significantly superior to that which was expected from the student, and who then feels professionally constrained to follow-up on their reflex and challenge the student formally.

Was the problem created by the editor or the student?

If you can choose who is to edit your work, and you intend to pay them, count yourself lucky. You’re in a position to begin a relationship which can have huge benefits to you personally and to your work and over which you will have control. But you do need to have more than just a clue about who it is you’re going to employ, and you do need to understand that it is best if you regard the editing process in terms of an understanding relationship rather than a series of technical steps.

To that end, spend some time with me on my website: I’m sure you’ll get a fair idea of how my mind works and what I can offer to you.