Back to earth with a thud

   




I've always loved Little Bear (as drawn by Maurice Sendak)

imagining himself flying to the moon and telling his mother all about his plans.
And I also love his mother, in the words of Else Minarik, replying that maybe he is "a fat little bear cub" and "will come down very fast, with a big  plop."

I've landed with a big thud: my book is off to its first readers and I'm back in the world of doing my freelance work and getting my taxes done and cleaning my house, those kinds of things. Being OUT OF that world and in another of one's own creation is part of the fun of writing.

But this book reminded me of the other things I love about writing -- things I haven't felt in a long, long time. When I revise, I can just do it -- and for long hours at a stretch; it's very satisfying to be so engrossed and to see something get better. The first draft is usually torture, though: all the waiting, all the times when nothing comes or what does seems (and may well be) completely inadequate. This time, though, sometimes what I wrote in the first draft  surprised me and  made me laugh out loud, and that was fun, too.

One difference between a book that has life and potential and one that doesn't are those surprises, those ideas that just come....but those moments don't mean the book as a whole is GOOD or even works.

What I enjoyed most, though, was being IN the book: not wanting to do anything else. Not thinking about anything else. Waking up in the morning and wanting to write -- even though it usually took a lot of dawdling before that happened.

This is the first book I've really enjoyed writing in a long, long time -- and whether it all holds together or not (my biggest worry), whatever my first readers say about it, I've had that -- and learned a lot, too, about how to make it happen.

Differences between published and unpublished mss.

     




Lately I've been coaching people writing fiction, and have noticed some big differences between published and unpublished manuscripts.  The first 4 can all be corrected if the writer wants to take the trouble to correct them; the next 3 three I think depend upon having some talent......

The list helped me fix my OWN writing and I sent it along to one of the people I coach, too. He also found it helpful -- maybe some of you will.

If you disagree with some or can think of others I haven't mentioned, PLEASE comment.

1. Published writers use dialog to move the story along or develop character. Unpublished writers use it to take up space or give the reader information that could be more economically given in some other way.

UPWs almost always let their dialog go on way too long. Conversations in books (unlike conversations in real life!) should end as soon as their dramatic purpose has been achieved.

2. PWs give readers just the right amount of back story/information about the characters and situation -- not too much, not too little. UPWs tend to either give WAY too much -- telling us all much more about the characters' pasts or the present situation than we need to know -- or so little that we are completely confused.

3. Simiarly, UPWs often spend more time describing a scene/setting it up than letting it play out. PWs concentrate their energies and our attention on what happens -- and in every scene, something does.

4. UPWs introduce characters, facts, situations and then abandon them without developing them or bringing them to a conclusion. PWs make sure that if there is a gun lying on the table, it goes off, or fails to go off, or gets confused for the murder weapon or plays some other role in the story. Otherwise, why mention it? Similarly, if they describe a character in Chapter 4, that character has a role in what happens. He doesn't just get introduced in a paragraph of backstory, stroll in to ask about the weather, and then disappear.


5. It is amazing HOW MUCH HAPPENS in a well-constructed novel. Many amateurish attempts simply contain too little -- they're too slight to be interesting.

6. PWs write about people who come to life in the readers' minds -- their characters seem real, we care what happens to them. UPWs' characters are hard to tell apart or remember, or they're unconvincing -- they seem made-up/flat/fake and we don't care what happens to them (and often,  not much does -- see #5). Conveying what a person is like with a few well-chosen details IS an art, but being interested in other people and noticing things about them is a really good start!

I remember an amateur writer -- a doctor -- who was incredibly good at this, even though he had no writing experience. For example, he described a character as dressed in a cowboy hat and boots, and adding the comment that on anyone else, it would have looked silly or affected; but on him, it looked natural and stylish. Later in the scene, when this character replied to something another character had said, the narrator commented that he couldn't tell what he was thinking:
"His was a poker face."
When, later, this same character saved the day with a really brilliant move, it all fit, we believed it -- because the author had chosen the right details to describe him/let us know what he was like.

7. Some writers (both published and unpublished, IMHO) simply have nothing to say -- and these people shouldn't be writing at all, or should wait until they've thought of something.

8. PWs
"Use the right word, not its second cousin." -- Mark Twain

Some UPWs just plain can't write: they misuse words, make grammatical mistakes, are incredibly wordy, use way too many adjectives, always embellish the word "said" or avoid it in favor of words they consider more interesting -- which is like avoiding the word "the".....

This (#8) can be corrected by a little work on the part of the writer: using a dictionary (not a Thesaurus, a dictionary), mastering the concepts in a book like The Elements of Style by Strunk and White, simply paying attention!

Of course, #8 can also be fixed by a good editor, but it's been my experience that those who commit #8 also do so many of the others that I don't think any editor is likely to bother. So the ms. will never get that far.

____

Lastly, I hope this doesn't sound snobbish: I did begin by admitting that MY writing, especially in the earlier drafts, contains some of these things ...and maybe that brings me to one more:

9. PWs usually rewrite -- many, many times. UPWs seem to think one draft is enough, and when it isn't, they give up.

One of the hardest things about writing is that YOU JUST DON'T KNOW -- maybe those who give up are saving themselves a lot of wasted time and energy (if writing something that never sells is a waste of both). Or maybe they're missing the chance to find out, or get something great out into the world.

There are no guarantees, and until you've done your very, very best work I don't think anyone can tell you.

teeth and work and balance

Last Thursday I had a tooth pulled. I've been having some other teeth issues related to teeth grinding and a misaligned bite that require me to wear a mouth guard during the day for 4-6 months. I've already had a mouth guard to wear at night since college for the aforementioned teeth grinding and TMJ. (I have bad teeth in general--lots of cavities. I think it's genetic.)

Anyway, long story short, the oral surgeon said to me before the surgery, "I guess it goes without saying that you have a stressful job!"

I paused. Because the truth is, my job IS stressful. Or, at least, I get stressed by my job. Everyone in my company gets stressed out. My first assistant would grind through mouth guard after mouth guard. But I laughed and said, "Well, yeah, but it doesn't sound like it would be stressful. I'm a children's book editor."

I realized how ridiculous that sounded.

I remembered this post from about five years ago--"It's not brain surgery." Anyway, I think I take myself too seriously sometimes. I need to remind myself to keep things in perspective.

Getting a random comment such as the one from Anonymous (of course) on my post last week didn't help any. Because the comment was so ridiculous, I have to assume that it was a joke, or at least something written, for whatever reason, to make me angry. It DID make me laugh, and it DID make me a little angry. But anyway. Being a children's book editor is my job. Not my life. I value the work I do, and I dedicate way more than normal working hours to it, but I'm not a robot. I have to remember that balance in my life is important. It's important in everyone's life. Whether we ARE brain surgeons, or authors, or illustrators, or editors, designers, engineers, or teachers. We should all strive for excellence, but we need to also strive for balance. Yes, there's always something more we can do, but without balance, we'd be unstable, without balance, we burn out. With balance, we can do better jobs, and live better lives.

So, in honor of balance, let me share these quotations, all from the reliable source called the internet:

"What I dream of is an art of balance." ~ Henri Matisse

"Happiness is equilibrium. Shift your weight. Equilibrium is pragmatic. You have to get everything into proportion. You compensate, rebalance yourself so that you maintain your angle to your world. When the world shifts, you shift." ~ Tom Stoppard

"People with great gifts are easy to find, but symmetrical and balanced ones never." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Living in balance and purity is the highest good for you and the earth." ~ Deepak Chopra

"Balance is the perfect state of still water. Let that be our model. It remains quiet within and is not disturbed on the surface." ~ Confucius 

So you wanna be a children's book editor?

As I mentioned previously, I wrote a guest post on Justine Larbalestier's blog last week. I discussed what the job of a children's book editor entails, linking to several posts on this blog in the process.

In the comments sections, an author asked me what someone could do to "prepare" for a job in the editorial department, and I responded by listing some of the things I look for when hiring an assistant or intern:

-passion for children’s books: you need to be well read, ideally in a wide variety of genres–not too helpful if you only read fantasy, or only read romance. Be able to speak about the books you’ve read in a way that goes beyond “I liked it” or “I didn’t like it”
-bookstore or library experience shows a commitment to working with books.
-internships with publishers or literary agencies also show commitment to working in publishing.
-working with children is a plus, too.
-taking classes specifically in children’s literature at college or otherwise shows passion/interest as well

I thought I'd expand on this a bit to talk more about other things one could do to prepare for a job as an editorial assistant, and therefore a future editor.

In addition to the above, you could also:

-Take a writing class, and/or read books on writing. A few I'd recommend: Bird by Bird by Anne Lamott, On Writing by Stephen King, and The Forest for the Trees by Betsy Lerner. This will help with the editing process.
-Take a class in advertising or marketing writing, and/or study jacket copy: practice writing your own jacket copy
-Join a book club, practice speaking critically about books
-Hone your public speaking skills: as an editor, you'll have to present books at acquisitions meetings and sales meetings in front of rooms ranging from 10 people to 50 people. It's also helpful to be able to give talks at conferences, sometimes for rooms up to 1,000 people. The latter isn't a requirement, but it's a good skill to have. Join Toastmasters!
-Take a proofreading and/or copyediting course, and/or study up on grammar rules and learn proofreader marks.
-Read up about the publishing industry: read Publisher's Weekly, School Library Journal, the Horn Book, blogs (Fuse #8, Galley Cat, Nathan Bransford's, etc.), articles, book reviews, etc. It's especially helpful nowadays to try to keep up with what's going on with electronic publishing.
-Read read READ as much as you can. Read both classics and contemporary work. Read as many different genres as you can. Have your preferences, both in terms of genre and format, but be able to evaluate books of all genres and age groups. 
-Learn how to juggle ;)

Here are the qualities/skills I think are most essential for gaining a job as an editorial assistant:
-hard worker
-quick learner
-ability to multitask
-ability and willingness (no, eagerness) to tackle administrative duties such as filing, photocopying, and answering phones
-love reading and books!
-be able to speed read
-be able to also read carefully
-analytical/critical reading
-passion and energy
-ability to work well with others
-ability to keep calm under pressure
-good spoken and written communication skills

If you're serious about working in publishing, you'll have to move to where the companies are: mainly New York, Boston, and San Francisco. It's extremely hard to get an interview if you're not in the city where the job is located--I believe this will be the case no matter what industry you're trying to break into. As I told another commenter:

If you want to work for a publishing company, you’ll probably have to move to where one is. Most are in NY, some in the Boston area, a few in CA…but if you’re not able to relocate, you could research to see if there are any literary agents living nearby, and see if they need interns and/or manuscript readers. As I mention above, you could also work in a bookstore or library. There are many ways to have a career in books! But it’s tough to break into an industry if you don’t live where the industry is housed.

And finally, if you're interviewing for a job in children's editorial:
-Be prepared to answer the questions: What are your favorite books? and What have you read recently that you've liked? Why? If you haven't read any children's or young adult books in the last six months or so, the interviewer may question your commitment and love of children's books.
-Make sure you've done your research, both about the publishing company (know and have read a number of books published by the company) and the person interviewing you (I fully expect people I interview to have Googled me and found my blog).
-Practice standard interview questions, such as, What are your strengths and weaknesses? and Where do you see yourself in five years? For the latter, if you say that you see yourself anywhere other than in publishing still, don't expect to get the job over candidates who want to be in publishing long-term.
-Above all, show your passion and interest in children's books

I hope this is helpful! Any questions?


***

In other news, I love this blog post about tackling social media. Also, the School Library Journal Battle of the Kids' Books is beginning! Yarrr!

On editing

I loved all of the comments from my post last Monday, and thanks to everyone who linked to the post. If you haven't commented yet, please do! It was fascinating to read the different reactions you have to editorial letters, but overall, I feel safe in feeling that authors want *good* input from editors.

A few people forwarded this Salon.com article to me on editing that I found interesting--it's about magazine editing, but I think still applicable to books. An excerpt:

To people not in the business, editing is a mysterious thing...Many times over the past 20 years, people have asked me, "What exactly does an editor do?"

It's not an easy question to answer. Editors are craftsmen, ghosts, psychiatrists, bullies, sparring partners, experts, enablers, ignoramuses, translators, writers, goalies, friends, foremen, wimps, ditch diggers, mind readers, coaches, bomb throwers, muses and spittoons -- sometimes all while working on the same piece.

Read the whole article here.

When I'm asked what I do at parties or elsewhere, I answer "I'm a children's book editor," and the conversation oftentimes ends with the other person saying, "Wow, that's cool!" or "Oh, interesting," and then not knowing what more to say. But occasionally it starts a whole conversation about what being an editor entails, usually starting when the person says, "Oh, I could never do that, I'm horrible at grammar" to which I say, "Yeah, I am, too." For some reason, many people assume that when I say I'm a children's book editor, I actually write (or want to write) children's book. "No, I don't write, I'm an editor."

It is truly a mysterious thing for those not in the business. I assume that most (if not all) of the readers of this blog are in the business is some way, so I won't go into more detail regarding what a children's book editor actually does, but if anyone would like me to go through my duties in a future post, I'd be happy to oblige. But briefly, as I described it once on a panel discussion, I'm basically a project manager, and I will say that I completely agree with "the editor should be invisible" and the "asking questions" model.

Here's a wrap-up of some of my other posts on editing:
How I edit
Young 'uns
Writing versus Editing
How do I know I'm a good editor?
Friendship in work
Give credit where credit is due?
Editing styles and Comic Con
And what makes me so qualified to edit children's books?

And a wonderfully informative post from our guest blogger of what an editor at a packager does:
What's with these packaged books?

In other news, I finally finished Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows this weekend. Thanks to Anna for her patience in letting me silently tear through the last 100 pages or so while she was cooking us dinner. And for cheerfully asking me how it ended and letting me "spoil" it for her, because of course I was dying to talk about it. We wondered this weekend if anything like the publication of this last HP book would ever happen again, if ever the publication of one book would be so widely heralded and eagerly awaited, crossing gender and age lines. Hard to imagine it happening again, but I hope it does.

Speaking of editorial letters...

My former colleague Amy Lin (formerly Amy Hsu) has launched editomato, " a small, online business offering developmental editorial services to children's book writers aiming to be published in the trade market." Amy is an incredibly fantastic and well-respected editor with superb taste, and when we worked together, I relied on her heavily for editorial advice and support. She left the company to move away to where her husband lives. How dare she.

Amy was responsible for getting Patrick McDonnell on our list, and edited his NY Times Bestselling The Gift of Nothing. She has edited such beautiful books as What Are You So Grumpy About? by Tom Lichtenheld, Ninjas, Piranhas, and Galileo by Greg Leitich Smith, The Geography of Girlhood by Kirsten Smith, and after her departure freelance edited Jeremy Fink and the Meaning of Life by Wendy Mass and Exploratopia by the Exploratorium.

So, if you want a great editorial letter, check out her site! It's adorable and nicely designed, to boot. Plus, she's a great friend!

How do authors feel about receiving editorial letters?

Last week, there was a very interesting but short-lived blog post over at Fuse #8 that some of you may have read. It involved how an author felt to receive editorial comments. I believe he/she (from now on I'll just assume the author is a man, although I really have no reason to assume this) said something to the effect that it made him feel as if he was "disintegrating like a kicked mushroom." Then there was a parody of an editorial letter, as if written for Goldilocks and the Three Bears. It including points such as, "I'm not sure how realistic the scene with the porridge is. Why would mama bear's porridge be 'too cold' while papa bear's porridge was 'too hot'? Describe more the physics of the shape of the bowls that could explain this further" and "You mention the color of the heroine's hair at the beginning of the book, but then not much later on. What is the significance of this? Maybe include more examples throughout?" etc. etc. It was actually very well done and entertaining (I'm not doing it justice), but my reaction was also to say "ouch" because it was a little too accurate, and also one of an editor's greatest fears that authors feel this way when they receive our letters.

Well, the post was taken down, because Fuse said that the author feared that his editor would recognize herself in the letter, which I thought was a bit amusing, because every editor I spoke to recognized herself in the letter, including me. I think most editors have similar styles, in part because of Dear Genius, in part because as I've mentioned before, becoming an editor is an apprenticeship, and we all learn from those who have come before us.

I'm disappointed that the post was taken down, because I think it brings up a good topic of conversation. When I read the post, there were four or five comments, all reflecting a similar opinion that the letter was entertaining but a bit unfair, and a few authors commented that they welcome editorial letters.

So, let me pose the question here. How do you authors/illustrators feel about receiving editorial comments? Please, be honest and as candid as you'd like. Editors want to know the truth!

Writing versus Editing

Happy New Year, everyone! I've been somewhat out of practice posting here, missing my last two weeks because of the holidays. But I'm back, and raring to go. And I've been updating and upgrading my personal blog in the meantime.

Speaking of my personal blog, in response to this "Why do I blog" post, I was asked the following question which I'll use as the topic of my post here:

Here are some questions, possibly for the BRG blog, but personal, too, and inspired by your admission that you are currently better equipped to edit than to write.

What is the essential difference in skills required for writing and editing? Specifically, what are your strengths as an editor and weaknesses as a writer? As you see them, of course.

I'll admit that that admission was somewhat of a throwaway statement on my part, maybe just an excuse for why I'm not writing a book even though I'd like to someday, but after thinking about it (great question!), here are my conclusions. First of all, although I think that writing and editing require different skills and practice, the skills involved complement each other, which is why I think there ARE many editors who also write, and why most writers can edit (although not usually their own stuff). Editing is all about being a reader, being able to identify problems and recommend solutions, to predict issues that other readers may notice. It doesn't involve being able to craft an amazing sentence, to come up with that beautiful metaphor or imagery, to create living, breathing characters. It just requires you to be able to identify when a sentence or passage isn't working, to recommend where or when that beautiful metaphor or imagery may need to be inserted, to point out when a character's personality isn't coming through.

I think another of my strengths as an editor comes because I'm not a writer, because I wouldn't even begin to try rewriting an author's work. I think for some editors it's a temptation, or even a practice to be very heavy-handed with line editing, but I see this as being disrespectful of the author. But maybe it's because I know my weakness as a writer that I tend to acquire very literary writing--where the actual writing/voice needs less guidance, and I'm able to focus more on the big-picture issues, and making sure moments are working, the plot makes sense, believability issues. Then again, and this is where the whole "finding the right editor-author fit" is important--I think some authors want/need editors who are more hands-on, and others prefer not.

I think one of my strengths as an editor is that I'm able to ask the difficult questions of the author, and push them to take the work to the next level. I think (I hope!) that I'm also able to ask the questions in a way that doesn't offend, to balance the recommendations with praise.

In terms of my weakness as a writer, I also tend to be long-winded, and I tend to overuse adjectives (at least in my marketing writing). I also think I lack subtlety in my writing. And although I can see all this, I can't really seem to solve it for myself. It's like relationship issues--it's so much easier to understand and solve someone else's problems, but when it comes to your own issues, you're blind to them. And this, of course, is another main difference. I think most writers can edit, but nobody can truly edit their own work. Oh, and one more weakness? I don't have any good ideas for books. I think one of the reasons it would be hard for me to write as well as edit is that I read SO MUCH in my job, that I would be afraid that I'd steal an idea that I've read without realizing it.

As I said, I think both writing and editing require skill and practice. I honestly don't know what talent/skill for actual editing that I already possessed when I came into the job--although I've always been a voracious reader, especially as a child, when I started my job I felt at a disadvantage because I wasn't an English major and did not have four years in college to focus on critical reading. But I think years of reading submissions and focusing on editing and writing editorial letters, and reading other editors' editorial letters in my company (I mentioned this in my "How I Edit" post), have allowed me to continue to acquire the skills to do my job. If, instead, I had focused on writing all of these years, perhaps I could be as confident in my writing skills as I am in my editing skills, but that is not the path I have taken.

Of course, talent doesn't hurt, either, and when I read the works that my authors' write, I respect them so much and am in awe. And I honestly don't think I have that level of talent in me, no matter how hard I worked at the craft. I don't have the writing bug in my soul like most of the authors I know.

I think I have many strengths as an editor that do not involve the actual skill of editing, but as I think the latter part was the intent of the question, I won't go into that here.

This was a very tough question, and I'm not sure if I haven't answered it to my own satisfaction. And, ironically, I'm not sure if I edited this post to my satisfaction! But this is a blog (not a book), and I wanted to post this on time this morning.

I'd love to hear what other authors and editors think. And heck, what do the authors I've worked with think? I've edited two of the BRGs: so Grace and Libby, what do you think my strengths as an editor are? We can save the weaknesses for another time. :) Because I certainly have those as well, and it's easier for me to list those off, so I won't.

How I edit

People will think I'm a horrible writer. I'll never write another book again. I don't know what I'm doing. What if I'm wrong?

Sound familiar? Do you have these thoughts, these doubts? Well, replace "People" with "The author," replace "write" with "edit" and you have the doubts that go through my head every time I edit a manuscript and write an editorial letter. I get the same anxiety when I send off an editorial letter as authors get when they send off their manuscript to an editor. Or artists when they send sketches or final art. (Okay, well, maybe not "the same" but similar.) I don't want to hurt the author's or illustrator's feelings, or anger them. I don't want them to think I'm incompetent and/or crazy. Because I have the highest level of respect for the creative people I work with, because I could never do what they do.

I hope that my editorial letters have the right balance of praise and constructive criticism. I know that it can be intimidating to receive a four or seven-page editorial letter. But I hope my authors know that I love their writing, love their work, to know that we're on the same team.

The task of writing an editorial letter to me is daunting, and I certainly had no idea how to go about doing it when I edited my first novel (sorry, Libby!). But I learned as time went on, I learned from my mentors, and I learned from reading the correspondence files that circulate in my department: each week, everyone in editorial (when we remember to do this) places copies of our editorial letters and other outside business correspondences into a centralized folder which is then circulated throughout the editorial department so that we can be aware of other editors' projects, problems that other editors are having that may be similar to our own, and also so the younger staff can read many different editorial letters to start to understand how to write them. I think this process is the same in most other companies, and it's one of the crucial learning tools for an editorial assistant.

I think every editor develops his or her own editing style, and I've certainly honed my own throughout the years. I shared some of my revision process at the SCBWI annual conference in LA, but I thought I'd go through it now in more detail in the hopes that it will be helpful. It's generally always changing slightly, but I just went through this four+ times in the past few weeks, so it's pretty fresh in my mind.

1) First, I read through the manuscript (this is my favorite part of the process!). I make very few notes, just read for the experience, and jot down things I notice, usually broad, over-arching things. (Although if I do happen to notice a typo or sentence that feels off here and there, I'll mark it.) But I'm really just looking to get a fresh read, reading for the overall experience as a final reader would. Is it enjoyable? Am I pulled into the book right away? Is the pacing off? Do I care about the characters? Does the plot make sense? Is the ending satisfying?

2) Then, if I can, I'll let it sit for a few days. Sometimes, right after the first read I think, "there's nothing I could do to improve that novel!" But inevitably things will come to the surface during that "sitting" time, issues with the plot, questions about certain characters, solutions (suggestions, I should say) to problems I've been having with the book, resolution to how I've been feeling about the ending, etc. I also want to see if the book "stays with you"--do I remember it several days later?

3) After a few days, I'll sit down again with the manuscript and go through it carefully, line by line. I do some line-editing now, although I think I'm generally pretty light overall in this regard. I tend to just call out sections or underline sentences that aren't working for me, but rarely will I actually reword things myself--as I've said before, I'm not a writer myself, so I like to give the author the freedom to work it out themselves. I'll jot down more notes on a separate sheet of paper that I know I'll have to expand on in an editorial letter.

4) And then finally, I copy my generally messy notes onto a clean copy of the manuscript that will be sent to the author. This step not only allows me to clarify my notes for the author, but to also review my edits, decide if I still agree with them. As I do this, I also expand on issues I need to in an editorial letter, trying to offer several suggestions for how I think an issue can be solved as I go. Sometimes I add and delete my own edits as I go along. I'll often just type things out into a Word document chronologically first, and then later go through my letter and reorganize it by topic: characterization, plot, pacing--whatever I think the main issues are in the manuscript.

5) I tweak the letter a lot. Get it to the structure I want, add the opening and closing (make sure the author knows that these are my suggestions only, not demands), print it out and edit it on paper two or three times until I think it's ready, and then send it off. I'll usually email the letter first and then send the hard copy of the manuscript to follow a few days later. This way, the author has a day or two to mull over my comments before they receive the actual manuscript and start to work, and inevitably their subconscious mind will already be starting to work out solutions to problems with the manuscript (if they agree with my comments, that is!).

And I fully expect the author to disagree with me sometimes, and if they offer me an explanation later to why they disagreed and didn't revise something, that's fine with me. Occasionally there's an issue that I feel especially strongly about, and in those cases, I'll keep requesting the change on subsequent revisions, reiterating why I think it's a problem. But after asking three or four times, there's not much more that I can do. Ultimately, it's the author's work, and we can't force the author to make changes he or she is not comfortable with, or in agreement with.

This process repeats until the manuscript is "done." Generally, the first editorial letters are more general, and as we go I get more nitpicky about the little things, and the last edit is just "clean-up" of all of the little things that are left. I've never taken less than two rounds, and on average it takes three or four, oftentimes more. And I put "done" in quotations because sometimes it feels like it's never really done to the author--they want to keep tweaking and revising. But at a certain point, we need to declare it done and get it into copyediting.

So, there you have it, my process. Of course, depending on the time crunch, sometimes this process is cut down--I'll combine 1 and 3 and delete 2. Or I'll combine steps 3 and 4. Or I'll cut down on how many times I edit my own letter. Also, when I'm reading a revision, unless there were many structural changes or major plot-point changes, the "fresh read" isn't as crucial a step.

I am an editor, and although editing is probably one of the most important parts of my job, I feel that it's only 10-15% of my job description. In fact, when I was on a panel at the New School last year and explaining what I did, I completely forgot to include "edit"! But as daunting as it is, I do relish it. I love examining these works of art carefully, trying (and I emphasize "trying") to get to know the book as well as the author does. I do respect the work, even as I seemingly "rip it apart," and ultimately I just want to help the author get the work to the next level and get it ready to introduce to the world.


***

Check out my updated "How I edit 2.0" post.

And what makes me so qualified to edit children's books?

It's interesting that Meghan just wrote about "What makes us so qualified to write for kids?" yesterday, because earlier this week I was just thinking about writing this post. I think about this every time I speak at a writer's conference, because as I've mentioned before, it feels odd to be in this position of power.

Some people think it's weird that so many children's book editors don't have children of their own. At my company, the only editor with children is our Publisher. There are many editors out there with children, but at my company it's a rare thing, and it's not deliberate. Many of us hope to have children one day. Many children's book authors and illustrators also don't have kids, and in fact a few famously dislike them. So, does this make us less qualified to judge what children will like? I don't think so.

To expand on what I've commented below, to a cewrtain extent, kids will like most anything you put in front of them if you present it the right way. Of course, this isn't completely true, but this is why so many prospective writers say in their cover letters, "I've tested this on my child/grandchild/2nd grade class/daycare and they loved it" and why this doesn't influence us editors one little smidgeon. For the most part, kids will like a little cartoon with stick figures about a person who farts that you draw for them. But do I want to publish that? No. But perhaps another editor will. The truth is, children are so diverse--one child's favorite picture book will be the Berenstain Bears, another's will be The Snowy Day by Ezra Jack Keats, another's will be Todd Parr's books. And another will love all three, but hate Richard Scarry. It's hard to predict what child will like what book, and it could drive us crazy trying.

I think much of the answer is illuminated by Libby's post on Wednesday. Seven beginnings, and for the most part, we all had different reactions to them. It just reinforces the fact that this is a subjective business.

Not to keep beating the diversity issue over the head, but the truth is, editors have different tastes and philosophies, and the more diverse a group editors are, the more we will ensure that we're publishing books that all kinds of children will like. When I acquire a book, sometimes I'm acquiring it as the kid I once was, and sometimes I'm acquiring it as the adult I've become. Everything comes into play. The editor of the Gossip Girl and A-List series, who works on mainly young women's commercial fiction, has said that she's looking for books that will entertain--that's her main goal, and she's certainly achieved that. Another editor is looking for really fun, humorous middle grade novels that are age appropriate. I tend to be drawn to novels that I feel are "important" (I feel a little silly saying that, but it's true). And because of the different interests and backgrounds and tastes of our editors, our company published a pretty wide range of books: commercial and literary, silly and serious, issues and light, fiction and fantasy, historical and contemporary, etc..

But I guess I haven't really answered the question of what makes me qualified. But the truth is, I don't really know. I'm a voracious reader. I have been from before I can remember. I love books. But is that enough? Part of it is just the on the job training, the apprenticeship. I could go through my resume--my bookselling experience, my internships, working with children, "playing well with others..." I don't know what it is, really. Many people don't last long in this business, and yet I can't imagine being apart from it. Maybe it's the same thing that drives people on the creative side. The passion, the love, the need. At any rate, here I am, and here I hope I'll stay.