Editing Resource Analysis
The editing-related book I chose for this assignment is…
In my book proposal, I had chosen two books, but for the purpose of this assignment I am going to be analyzing Developmental Editing by Scott Norton.
I chose this book because…
I chose Developmental Editing because of the focus that it has on non-fiction editing. I love fiction, and read a lot of it. Because of my familiarity with a lot of fiction genres and writing styles, I think that I would have a much easier time editing that. I wanted to choose something that would help me challenge myself, which I think this text will do. Something else that stood out to me about this book was its relative popularity online. When I searched for the books that I wanted to use, this one came back on several different best of lists.
My expectations before reading this book were…
Going into this book, while I knew of its popularity, I expected it to be a little dry and hard to follow at times. Since it is centered around nonfiction writing, I think I had the assumption that it would be more geared towards accuracy, or the more minute parts of writing. I did also expect, though, that it would be a detailed and well rounded explanation of what developmental editing is, how to handle it, and the different perspectives involved in the process.
My expectations were met because…
My expectations of the value and content of this book were absolutely met. This is a really thorough look at the entire process of developmental editing. The book itself is set up in a way that takes you through a developmental edit of several different scenarios, helping the reader to understand the practical applications of the material put forth.
My expectations were NOT met because…
The case study aspect of this book, for the most part, was not what I expected from this text and I found it to be much more engaging than I had presumed it would be. I thought that using this as a way to illustrate the editorial concepts helped me understand how they could be used more effectively in practice. It was not nearly as dense and difficult to read as I expected, and I found that I could easily follow the concepts and solidify them using the style and methods that Norton put forth. Something else that I did not expect was how much this would offer on the development of the argument being made by the author. There is an entire chapter devoted to this task and I found that this much of a focus was not something that I had considered, but see how important it is for the nonfiction author and editor.
2-3 practical moments in the book were (include page numbers)…
One of the most practical moments in the book is page 36 to 37, which includes a sidebar on how exactly one becomes a developmental editor. Considering that the book is all about developmental editing, I found this moment charming and useful, especially as someone who is not consulting this book as an already established editor, and instead someone looking to enter the field without much direction or idea of how. An important reminder that this sidebar ends with on page 37 is the advice to be patient, which can be terribly difficult for someone who is looking to break into a new field or begin their whirlwind career. I think that the practice of editing itself is an exercise in patience, so it makes perfect sense that this would be an important thing to keep in mind.
I think that the entire afterword, pages 221-222, is extremely practical in application. One of the key points listed here is to “intervene strategically”, and for the young and green editor (or, really, me) this is sound advice. I have a habit of trying to do the most that I can and overachieve in many situations, and holding this piece of advice is something that will be really helpful for my own editing philosophy. Time, money, and brainpower management is important, especially from a freelance perspective, and being able to decide what it is that really needs the full workup will help me make the most of my efforts and energies.
A really confusing moment in the book was (include page numbers)…
One thing that was pretty confusing to me in this text was the case study put forth in chapter 2, pages 28 to 47. I was not confused by the editing advice itself, but rather by the situation and story that was provided to illustrate the concepts outlined in this chapter. I thought that what Norton describes here in terms of what “assessing potential” means made a lot of sense, but I found myself very put off by the example used. I felt that the idea of someone pretending to be a woman, going so far as to take estrogen and try to make them believe that they were in fact a woman, was disrespectful to trans women and out of place. There are plenty of other ways that the author could have illustrated this concept, and I think that this left me with a bit of a skeptical and critical lens and I continued through the text. Not to say that their editorial information and knowledge is not necessarily valid, but it made me think about why I would want to take that knowledge and information from someone that was willing to make what felt like a mockery of a very real and often difficult human experience.
I wish the author(s) had talked more about and less about…
I think that this is more a product of the type of editing that is focused on in this text, but I would have appreciated a little bit more in terms of point of view and how to help edit that cohesively. Otherwise, you don't know what you don’t know, and since I went into this rather blind in terms of what developmental editing is and how it functions, I don’t think there was anything that I truly wish Norton wrote less about. I found the text informative and there wasn’t really anything that I found arbitrary or not useful.
[SYNTHESIS FOCUS] The book connected to (a reading, a discussion, a guest-speaker’s talk, my growing philosophy of editing, etc.) in this way…
Throughout the course of reading this text, the reading that felt the most closely connected to it was the Author-Editor relationship that we read for our fifth reading reflection assignment. Since this takes into consideration not only the editor’s position in the process, but also the publisher’s and author’s, the power relationships are on display throughout the entire book. In the chapter dedicated to the restructuring and organizing of the book, there is a bit about how the author’s concerns about the edits can seem one way to the editor, and how the editor’s can to the author. I thought that this chapter, especially because of what it is outlining, is quite illustrative of the power dynamic at play in this type of editing. A developmental editor seems to have a much heavier hand when it comes to what the finished product of the book will be, and throughout this book I found myself thinking that from this perspective, the author is in some ways removed of their agency. There were even lines that felt as though the author is being infantilized, like they are unable to make the correct decisions in their process to bring the book to a place where it is sellable and profitable. While there must be a communicative and open relationship between author and editor for this process to truly produce a work that people will love, I found that the way that this text described the author-editor relationship really put the author in a place below both the editor and the publisher. Maybe due to my inexperience and lack of knowledge surrounding the industry (or my fairly anti-capitalist, pro-art leanings), I felt that this is an oversight when it comes to the power dynamic at play, as the author is the one who creates the work in the first place. There is nothing to edit, and nothing to publish, without the author first coming up with an idea and putting their time, effort, and often heart into creating something to be edited and published. I felt as though this book connected so well to that reading because it was an even deeper examination of the author-editor, and in this case publisher relationships that are at play.
I would rate this book on a usefulness scale of 1-10 (1 lowest; 10 highest) as a __#____ because…________.
On a usefulness scale, I would give this book a hard 7. I don’t really plan on editing nonfiction books, but suppose that if I plan on being an editor, having this in my wheelhouse will be important. Along with broadening my horizons and providing me with the opportunity to explore a different kind of editing, it also seems to be useful for the purpose of writing all sorts of different work. As I read this, I thought about how helpful it would have been to use this method and these practices when editing my own work throughout the course of my academic career. I sometimes have a tougher time with big picture editing as I get wrapped up in the details, and the approach that this book works with is quite useful in terms of being able to take a look at the work as a whole and edit it not only for the mistakes that need corrected, but to make it stronger and more cohesive as a whole.
