A Case for Gentle Editing
Little synchronicities in life never fail to amaze—and delight—me. A few weeks ago, I was writing some content for my web site. I was listing the various editing services I offer to clients and decided to include a few sentences that stated my philosophy on editing since I firmly believe that the underlying philosophy about our work—and the larger purpose it serves—shapes how we perform our work. I am of the view that the key benefits of an editing service should include (1) honouring authors’ wishes to have their manuscripts accurately reflect their authentic voices and truths and (2) collaborating with the authors to empower the clarity of the message.
A few days after writing the website content, I was reading Julia Cameron’s book The Right to Write. An Invitation and Initiation into the Writing Life (1998) and, would you believe it, tucked within a chapter on containing one’s work (i.e., being very selective about whom you share the early drafts of your work with) was a brief paragraph in which she described the qualities of her favourite editor! According to her, this particular editor inspires her to write freely, phrases his feedback gently in the form of questions, supports her strongest work and is not competitive with her (pp. 179-180). The editor’s love of good writing and enthusiasm for words inspires her to use words well (p.180). Bingo! Cameron has phrased it in slightly different words, but the gist of what she seems to like about this editor is that he works with her to empower the clarity of the message!
That one little paragraph just resonated for me like one of those large Tibetan singing bowls. There was my philosophy echoed back at me, but I only found this passage after I’d been shaping my philosophy for quite a few months! It confirmed for me that while editing does by its very nature involve providing feedback on—and often making corrections to—another individual’s work, how that feedback is conveyed to the writer makes all the difference to her openness to hearing and following up on the editor’s suggestions. It can profoundly influence whether the two parties, the writer and the editor, perceive the process as collaborative or adversarial. It’s the difference between engaging in a constructive process that nurtures the writer’s strengths and a destructive process that undermines the writer and his confidence at every turn of the page. It really comes down to this: Are you editing a piece because you love words and you genuinely want the author’s finished manuscript to reflect her voice in a style that captivates the reader with its elegance and persuasiveness? And if you must offer up some criticisms along the way, can they be gently phrased and framed in a way that helps the writer to most effectively convey the truth of the message she wants to share with the world?
To my way of thinking, an author’s manuscript is so much more than “just” a collection of carefully or artfully selected words and sentences intended to communicate ideas. It also captures much of the writer’s “Self”, hence the trepidation and vulnerability that sometimes accompanies the act of turning over one’s work to an editor. At the end of the day, it seems to me that working collaboratively with the writer, maintaining a sense of humour, honouring how much of the writer’s self is in the document, and providing encouraging feedback with respectfully phrased editing suggestions seems to produce a better manuscript and a more rewarding working relationship between editor and writer.
How about you? What are the qualities that you appreciate in an editor or a “friendly reader”?
June 5, 2010
· 
Susan · 
6 Comments
Posted in: Writing process
6 Responses
Excellent qualities for a editor to have when working with creative people.
Thank you, Rajiv. It’s been my observation that we tend to define “creative” rather narrowly in our culture, so a lot of people feel discouraged from even trying any new activity. But whether we’ve painted a picture, captured an interesting scene on film, applied existing ideas in an innovative new way or written a report for work, most of us want to hear what we did “right” than “wrong”. It seems to me that it’s more respectful and encouraging to focus on what’s good and then respectfully offer some very specific steps that could be taken to enhance what is already good rather than pick apart what someone has done and call it “constructive criticism”.
I wish you lots of inspiration and encouragement in pursuing whatever creative path you are called to follow in your life.
I look for someone that can tell me when I’m going wrong. Yes, I want them to do it in a gentle way, but I also want them to say this isn’t working, what can we do to fix it.
It’s why I prefer to have a few editors. Each one performs a function. One to guide me, one to check for errors, and one to make sure that I’m clear and created an enjoyable product.
Hi Karl,
Yes, editors do have to point out where a writer is going wrong or off-track or they wouldn’t be doing their job. The feedback process can be done in a way that is still respectful by starting with what’s right about the document, then moving onto what’s gone awry and offering specific suggestions for how to make the corrections, and then ending with an encouraging or positive statement about the work.
I love your description of gentle editing.
I worked with an editor once who game me specific feedback about the parts of a 1500 word chapter where my writing touched her emotionally, AKA rang true. That feedback was both gentle and profoundly affirming, because it helped me find my authentic voice. From there I was able to write with greater ease and flow, and greater impact for readers.
For me, focusing on what works well was empowering and inspiring, and I was able to make changes FAST. In my community development work, I find appreciative approaches consistently work best. Indeed the approach called Appreciative Inquiry, first framed in the mid 80s, has revolutionized the fields of community and organizational change.
Thank you for your clarity and gentleness! I trust it will nourish many important voices and creative endeavours.
Hi Kate,
Thanks for your kind words and for sharing your experiences with other readers. I know from my own writing experiences that getting a draft back with some positive statements about what worked well, and specific suggestions for the paragraphs and sentences that didn’t work so well motivated me to make changes much more quickly and effectively than a vague “This doesn’t work, expand on it or fix it.” kind of comment.
My sense is that it’s human nature to be far more responsive to feedback that is encouraging than discouraging, regardless of the activity. I can definitely see how an appreciative inquiry would nurture a greater willingness to make lasting positive changes in communities and organizations.
Let me know when you have your website launched as I’d love read more about what you do.
Leave a Reply