When I first trained as an editor, the process was simple. I received a hard copy of the manuscript, used copyediting symbols to mark up my corrections, and returned the pages with a style sheet and author queries.
Since then, things have changed – big time! Editing is now done onscreen. (So much for the hours spent learning those symbols!) This means I have access to a dizzying array of functions, macros and software platforms to speed up the process and improve the accuracy of my edits.
What's more, I have more contact with the author and the flexibility to interact with the manuscript in a way that prioritises author feedback and helps me edit more impactfully – such as editing chapter by chapter (instead of editing the whole thing and sending it off for review).
It's something I started doing early on in my career (after the transition to onscreen editing) and I haven’t looked back. Here's why:
Speed: The author doesn’t have to wait weeks or even months to see how the manuscript is shaping up. They can start reviewing chapters straight away, usually while I’m working on the next chapter. And because we’re working on the manuscript at the same time, it speeds up the editing process.
Feedback: Early feedback will guide how the edit progresses. I can usually gauge from their comments if my edit should be heavier, lighter or provide more explanations. Also, if they’ve made an unusual choice that recurs throughout the manuscript (and they’ve explained why it’s crucial), I won’t keep flagging it.
Less overwhelm: Working chapter by chapter feels less overwhelming and more achievable than working with a large manuscript – both for me and the author. We just focus on each chapter and give it the attention it deserves until it’s done, then we move on to the next one.
Fewer glitches: When I work with a large manuscript, particularly if it’s got a lot of track changes, comments, tables, figures and images, the Word file can start lagging and glitching. This means waiting for it to respond or reopening the document, which can slow me down. Plus, watching that spinning wheel is frustrating as hell! NOTE: If you use Google Docs, you may encounter frequent lagging. See Word or Google Docs: Which is better for editing? to find out why.
Fewer author corrections: I’ve known authors who had bad experiences with editors who made global changes (both tracked and untracked) without consultation. And it resulted in hours of work to undo them. While editors can query an author during the process, the act of seeing your edits is quite different, and it’s better if they see them earlier rather than later to avoid disappointment or unnecessary changes.
Are there times when I don't copyedit books chapter by chapter?
I still work with authors and publishers who prefer to receive the entire edited manuscript. And that’s okay. It’s an accepted industry standard and I'm happy to adapt to their needs. But I find my model more rewarding because the whole process feels like a creative partnership. I'm with the author every step of the way, guiding them, responding to their queries and building a professional relationship, which is half the fun! (For more on how I work, see What to expect when you work with an editor.)
What if the chapters are short?
If your book has short chapters, or no chapters at all (maybe it has 'parts' or 'sections'), I can still make this approach work. Usually, I'll divide up the manuscript into roughly equal parts. They could be quarters or thirds, depending on the length, and I'll send them separately. If there are other natural divisions in the manuscript, we can divide it up that way – anything that's intuitive and easy to manage.
Isn't a sample edit enough?
A sample edit is great for determining how heavy the edit will be and how much the whole job will cost. However, it doesn't tell me what issues may come up later. While I usually scan the entire manuscript at the start and ask questions about the structure and content, some problems only become obvious when we're in the midst of the edit. And if I send you each chapter as it's edited, we can catch those problems early and avoid costly or frustrating corrections later.
Final thoughts: Copyediting books chapter by chapter
There are pros and cons to editing all at once and editing chapter by chapter, but I'm definitely in the second camp. Not only does this approach streamline the process and facilitate feedback, but it also reduces overwhelm, minimises glitches and prevents time-consuming corrections later on. Let's face it, you don't want to spend your time changing 'jail' to 'gaol' or 'kilometres' to 'miles' because your editor made an executive decision without consulting you!
If this approach appeals to you or you’ve been burnt by global changes in the past, check out my Services page to find out more about my copyediting services or get in touch for a no-obligation sample edit.
Comments