Adaptability In Editing
Proper proofreading marks, strict timelines and running orders are a great knowledge base; but when collaborating with writers who are unfamiliar with editing practice, adaptability is a much more valuable skill. Often times editors will need to adapt their methods on the fly in order to work within unforeseen circumstances or communicate with other professionals who don’t share the same expertise. Each job is different and requires a different approach in order to make the collaboration the most effective. In order for an editor to do their best work on a project they need to be ready to completely abandon the idea of a strict ‘correct method’ and instead focus on the best method for the task at hand.
There are a few key areas that editors need to be open minded about when providing feedback to an author. I’ve outlined three areas that are important to keep in mind when approaching a new project.
Deciding On Communications Channels
Every author works differently and has distinct levels of accessibility and comfort levels when it comes to a working relationship. Some will want to be formal and communicate through professionally worded emails while others might be happiest responding to a request with a text simply saying ‘lol k’. It is important to establish how best to communicate with each author in the early stages of a project as it sets the tone of your relationship.
The easiest way to pick a communication channel is to make it the author’s decision right from the first meeting. Ask them if them how they would most like to communicate. Text, email, or even Facebook messenger are all valid options. Adapting to the platform the author is most frequently accessible on means that the communication will be streamlined. This saves precious time in a very time-consuming process and, in the end, can make all the difference to the amount of support you’re able to give the author.
Working With Hard Copy Proofs
When you reach the later stages of a project, working on a hard copy proof can introduce more challenges than are present at the copyediting stage. Being able to exchange the physical copy with your author can be difficult if either of you have time or geographical constraints. Also giving feedback on the proof itself can often be difficult due to limited space. Being able to solve problems like this takes some creative thinking and adaptability.
Working around problems like these is going to take compromise on both of your parts. One option for transporting a hardcopy print is to agree on a mutually beneficial pick up/drop off point. This can be at an office or even a home of both parties are comfortable with using that option. If this is not a viable option, the next best choice is to go digital. If you both have access to copies of the proof it is possible to write all the necessary corrections in an email or document. If this is the only option, it is vital to clearly outline the page number, line and words that need to be edited in the clearest language possible to avoid confusion.
Sometimes the proofs themselves can be difficult to give corrections on due to unforeseen issues. When editing a photobook I came across an issue I hadn’t anticipated, the pages were black and the text was white. This meant that I had to find an alternative method of writing up the feedback. The solution I settled on was writing corrections on sticky notes and placing them on each page. This worked well and can also be a simple solution for other issues such as a lack of space.
Text Marks
Textual marks are a valuable tool when communicating with someone who is familiar with them, however they can cause confusion and waste time when working with an author who is not. As a form of shorthand, proper copyedit and proofreading marks streamline a project. When working with someone who doesn’t know how to decipher them they simply look like gibberish. It is important to identify early on if it’s appropriate to use text marks or if it would be more effective to use a different approach.
There are many different methods that can be used as a more straightforward alternative to text marks. One approach I’ve used is to underline the passage that needs to be rewritten and then rewriting the passage elsewhere. Whether it be in the margin, on a sticky note, or on a separate document, this is one of the simplest ways to avoid confusion. One obvious drawback to this method is the amount of time it takes; however, it is the easiest way to lay it out for so that a person of any skill level will be able to easily understand.
Another simple method at the copyediting stage is to use the ‘track changes’ or ‘editing mode’ settings in Microsoft word or google documents. This makes it simple for the author to identify any suggested corrections that might need to be made using a method that is easy for them to understand. Unfortunately, this cannot be used at the proofreading stage, however at that stage most in text corrections should have been corrected earlier in the process.
Conclusion
Adaptability is a vital trait for any author to have. Our role in the writing process is one of support and therefore being able to change in order to best support an author is a central part of the job. While it is good to prepare for potential issues, it is the ones that we are unable to foresee that challenge us the most. It is how we respond to those issues that define a good editor.
