Self-Editing and Getting Edited

Reading Alex Clark’s Guardian piece last week on the Lost Art of Editing, author and long-serving publishing personality Carmen Callil’s derogatory comments on the role played by editors may have incensed me if her logic weren’t so painfully narrow. Let’s go through her ‘argument’:

i)  The general gist of Miss Callil’s opinion seems to be that the editor’s function was to stroke the author’s ego, a superfluous act fuelled by some old-fashioned nonsense about ‘relationship’ no doubt [Miss Callil’s inference here, I stress]

Author Miss Callil’s ego clearly doesn’t need more stroking hence her disregard for the role of Editor. No, give her a great copy-editor for a quick spell check and she’s practically good to go. After that, all she needs is a sales and marketing department to promote and deify her.

In her argument, there is no sense of the largeness that opening up your work to another perspective entails and demands. An editor advises …

One of the (many) reasons I would make a lousy writer is that I hate revision and self-editing.  This may seem contradictory when it's what I do for a job, but I cringe when I read my prose.  When I'm reading someone else's writing, I have that sense of detachment that allows me to see what is and isn't working.

Do you enjoy revising your work?  And when should you show your work to someone else for another opinion?  Or indeed - should you?

The golden rule is - don't show your work to anyone else when they are likely to come up with a list of suggestions that you are already half considering.  So if their comments are going to make you say things like 'yes, I thought that', or 'well this is only a rough draft', or 'I already know that needs changing', don't show them.

Showing a reader - whether a friend or relative, or an editorial consultant, a half-finished piece of work is frustrating for all concerned.  The reader wonders why you are asking their opinion when you …