I imagine it would also help to follow @Mckk 's suggestion, and pinpoint exactly what you want a professional editor to do for you. In other words 'check story flow.' Rather than, 'Hey, I've written a book! Can you please make it ready for publication?'
Very much so. Different editors do different things, and no one (legitimate) will be able to do all of it for you at an affordable price. You might need a developmental editor, a line editor, a specialist in a genre, and so on. Defining what you need is essential. I can generally proofread my own work, but I don't trust myself for story development.
Anyone who would write, much less pay hundreds of dollars for an editor, in the hopes of making a profit does not understand risk-taking and should reconsider their life choices. Writing is a huge time-sink; at least the lottery only wastes your money. It's completely idiotic that learning specialization only happens after public school, but that's the system we live with. Not a flattering comparison.
I'm not conflating that at all - I'm perfectly aware that in a trad publishing deal the publisher pays for editing - this about whether its worth hiring an editor at your own expense in order to make your self published work the best it can be. Also the sales thing isnt about dick measuring ( I have none so far so its not exactly a contest) as i said above its about someone claiming you can self publish succesfully without the help of an editor - and my asking for proof that that is the case based on sales acheived in that model. You seem to be saying that self published books don't sell in big numbers period, which is definitely not always true although it is in many cases. I would suggest that the books that break that paradigm are the ones which are properly edited, and have professional cover art, and are then properly marketed. Therefore saying "its not worth spending money on a self published book because you won't get it back becomes a self fulfilling prophesy, and my counter argument would be that if its worth doing its worth doing properly .... If you don't think your self published book is going to sell a decent number why bother self publishing it in the first place
Case in point Joanna Penn (who is entirely self published) says that in FY 15/16 she took $95k on 40,665 sales that's not JK Rowling/Lee child territory but its better than a poke in the eye https://www.thecreativepenn.com/2016/06/03/breakdown-book-sales/ She doesn't give a breakdown of costs - but given shes a full time (and her husband has quit his job to work with her) its fair to assume that shes still making a decent income
So why do it then ? - or more accurately why try to get work published ? Viz my point above about Joanna Penn and many others - it is not always the case that self pubbed work doesnt make money... and if you believe in your work and yourself you should give it the best possible shot. If you don't believe your work is good enough to spend a few hundred dollars on then you may as well just keep it for your own enjoyment
If you are already writing, you enjoy it, and people really like your work and want to read more, than you should try publishing. But unless you're already a successful author, you should never invest anything that would cause you financial difficulty. If you spend thousands of dollars, you're literally betting that your work will be a sensation - if it isn't, you have to work for years at a regular job to get that money back. No sane person would take those odds.
I disagree - regardless of the likelihood of making the money back no work should go into the public domain until its absolutely the best it can be . Putting out substandard work in amateur covers is what gets self publishing a bad name I'd agree that you shouldn't invest so much it causes you financial difficulty but at the same time if writing is your hobby most people expect to spend money on hobbies ... for example many amateur golfers spend money on lessons from the club pro, when they are never going to be good enough to turn pro themselves because they want to be the best they can be .... same with many other hobbies. Personally I hope to make money from my books, but even if I don't make a penny I still want anything that goes out with my name on it to reflect well on me, and I'm prepared to spend money to achieve that aim.
That's a valid choice - I'm simply pointing out that it isn't a rational decision in terms of making a living.
Writing novels with the aim of making a living is an irrational choice. Spend your writing hours at a minimum wage job and you'll earn more.
I write part time (quarter time?) and make about as much as I would if I were working two full-time minimum wage jobs. And I'm a merely proficient writer, not some kind of super-star. I've had some lucky breaks, for sure (mostly in the area of timing), but mostly I think I've had what success I've had because I treat writing as a business. I write what I know I can sell, not what "speaks to my soul" or "what my characters tell me" or whatever. I make sure my publishing schedule is regular. And I make sure I put out a uniformly high-quality product. Writing to make money is the best reason I can think of to pay for an editor. Then again, I don't think self-publishing is a good way to get a start in writing for money, so to some extent my advice only extends to people who've already established themselves through working with publishers. Still. Putting out a sub-standard product seems like a terrible way to build a business, and I firmly believe that getting an editor is a good way to make your book higher quality.
Totally agree. I'd say putting out a sub-standard product is a terrible way to build a readership as well. Even if a writer wants to self-publish, and do all the extra marketing work that will bring, it will never pay to put out a book that isn't pretty much perfect. Most people who refuse to read self-published books do so because the standard is frequently VERY low. Many of these books are full of basic SPAG errors, and other word choice or structural blunders that should be taken care of before publication. So if you want your work to sell at all, perhaps paying for a good editor would be a good investment? Or, if you can't afford to pay an editor then learn to do it yourself as best you can? It'll take a while and LOTS of work, but the effort will be worth it. Even if you never hit the big-time, you will have produced a product you can be proud of.
Don't get me wrong - I've said from the start I would never put out a book that hadn't been edited. But saying that hiring an editor is irrational because it will stop you making a living is just as irrational as self-publishing to make a living. The stats are there - the vast, vast majority of self-published authors make nothing. Again, doesn't mean either is impossible. But neither is rational if all you care about is profit.
Ah, I forgot the whole romance pulp market. (Not that I'm criticizing, it's as respectable a way to make money as anything.) What is it about fiction that requires the touch of another person? Why can't a writer be good enough to edit their books themselves? Or if they can't, why not ask another writer to do it?
If you forgot a third of the American book market, I don't think you should be giving people advice about rational decision-making in the business of publishing. Do you?
[emphasis in the quote is mine] I think that bit I highlighted: "that would cause you financial difficulty" is a valid point, but I also think the discussion is just a general one on the worth of hiring an editor, or the need for one, as opposed to whether it would be practical to get one. If hiring an editor is gonna put you in debt or have you considering remortgaging your house - hell no. Of course don't hire the editor. Be smart about it lol. But if you're serious about wanting an editor, one could save up. I don't think I'd advise anyone to take a loan out for a venture like this. Definitely do it only if you can actually afford it. If it puts you in financial difficulty, then that's not something I'd say you can 'afford'.
I have not published a book, and I haven't read all the replies in the thread, but I have read self published books by writers who hadn't had editors! It doesn't matter how good the idea is or how interesting the characters are if there are typos and grammar mistakes in the book. The readers usually pays good money to read it, don't cheat them!
It should be noted too that there's a wide spectrum of editing services available. Developmental and line editing can cost quite a bit, but a straight proofread is fairly inexpensive ($200 for 100k words or so). All that does is fix typos so you don't embarrass yourself. The book might still be awful, but it will at least be grammatically correct. I think anyone who self-pubs should at least get a professional proofread. Even professional proofreaders at major publishers fail to catch all the typos, so an author thinking they can do that themselves is taking a major risk. Five figures for any kind of edit is dipshit stupid... kind of like the "gold package" of vanity publishers.
Now with proofreading I'm less convinced. Surely that really is something a fellow beta reader or writer could do for you? Usually with these things it's advised to read it out loud yourself, get someone else to read it out loud, as well as read it in different formats. You catch different things when something's printed vs on screen sometimes. For myself, my spelling and grammar are pretty near perfect even during my rough draft (I didn't say this - my alpha reader who's been reading my WIP as I write it said it). It's not SPAG-error-free - but then, it's the rough draft I'm showing my alpha. Yet it's already about 99% SPAG error-free. Considering that, I don't think I wanna spend $200 on a proofreader. I'd rather put that towards developmental editing. It is, however, ironic that, in a post where I'm tooting my own horn about my SPAG prowess, I'm at a loss as to how the phrase "SPAG error free" should be hyphenated
yeah I tend to agree - my spag is awful, but my alpha and betas pick that stuff up - I'm more likely to want a structural edit tbh
If it takes a year to write an novel and an author is on a shoe-string budget, consider trying to save $10 a week. Skip purchasing coffee, or make your lunch instead of buying fast food. Cut back on cable or skip a movie night out every now and then, or don't purchase the latest video game. For Christmas or birthdays, ask for cash, toward helping to publish the novel you're working on...all those things can add up. If it's important enough to you, you'll sacrifice. If not, you won't. Sure, there are folks out there that are in such a tight financial situation that they've already cut to the bone (and possibly more), but most people can find a way to save a little, if they really, really want to. Save that money and invest it in editing and in decent cover art. Take any profits from sales, even if there are only twenty or thirty copies sold, and invest it in editing and cover art for the next work. The other option, if one cannot afford editing, is to submit the work to publishers (or seek an agent for representation) instead of self publishing. None of what is involved should cost more than having internet access (or going to the local library or someplace with free WiFi). Virtually every market has gone to some form of online submissions. If you find a publisher, they are going to pay for the editing and cover art, and some marketing--of course the quality of the editing, cover art and marketing will vary--so choose wisely--there are plenty of threads on the forum that discuss finding a publisher. While you're submitting your novel to agents/publishers, of course you're going to be working on the next one. Maybe over that time your financial situation will improve, and you'll be able to gather together the money for editing and cover art, for the first novel (if it didn't find a publisher) and/or for the second novel.
I don't usually get developmental editors for my self-published work... I feel like that's what I can count on betas for! I mean, I don't expect betas to suggest fixes, but they point out issues and then I can figure out the solution. But I don't see my own errors - I know what I wanted to type, and that's what I see. My work's reasonably clean, but it's not perfect. And I want as close to perfect as I can get.
So what kind of errors do you want an editor for? Remind me what developmental editing is - is it the pace/structure/build-up stuff? Interesting to see how writers are different!
