Developmental Editing

Developmental editing (also known as structural, content or substantive editing)

This is the kind of editing most people envisage in connection with fiction. Developmental editing looks at the narrative arc or plot of a novel, characterisation, storyline, structure, voice, and also at the quality of the writing. Some editors prefer to make annotations to the actual manuscript with margin comments or inline coloured text; others are more hands-on and will actually change words, move sections around, delete sentences and perhaps make suggestions for elements to be expanded upon.

Both styles of developmental editing should be sent to the author with an editor’s report, although it’s likely to be shorter from the hands-on editor. The editing report highlights the strengths of the work, identifies its weaknesses, proposes any changes, and explains in depth the reasons for them. Editors vary in how much detail they delve into in their report; one might say, for example: ‘The protagonist lacks agency in the crucial midsection; find a way in which the outcome can depend on her actions rather than those of the other characters,’ whereas another editor might go on to make several suggestions as to how this could be achieved.

This illustrates how individual editing can be; the way one editor works might suit one writer but not another. And each editor has their own individual strengths: one might excel at spotting holes in a plot or identifying where something isn’t particularly well explained or is too ambiguous; another might be hot on viewpoint and voice; a third may be adept at character arcs. Of course, an editor should be good at all three – and much more besides – but, as with writers, each has their own special forte. The best editors find ways to maximise the writer’s strengths and reduce the impact of any weaknesses. Once you begin to understand what an editor can do for a writer you realise how valuable it is to have one – and, as a reader, you understand how different that final book now in your hands might have looked in its raw state.

When writing a contracted work for a publisher, you’re more likely to encounter the hands-on kind of developmental editor who will make changes to your manuscript, but that’s not a given. Similarly, when using a freelance, there’s no guarantee you’ll get the comments-only kind. When looking for a freelance editor, though, whether you ask other writers for recommendations or use organisations such as All, the CIEP or the Crime Writers’ Association for pointers, you can ask for an example of how they work to ascertain whether their style of editing is what you prefer. And it’s not just the level of editorial input that should concern you. Over the years, I’ve been surprised at the differing tones used in manuscript comments by editors working for me: some are very gentle and every comment is prefaced with ‘You might like to consider…’ or ‘Maybe you could think about…’; others are more brusque: ‘Waffles. Condense.’ This is something else to think about if you are free to choose your editor: are you a delicate flower who responds well to a subtle hint that something could be improved, but who wilts at anything smacking of criticism, or do you respond best to direct instruction and find anything else irritatingly unnecessary? Most writers – and editors – probably fall between the two, but it’s worth looking at a trial sample to check that its tone suits you.

Many writers nowadays invest in freelance editing not only if they intend to publish independently but also as a precursor to securing a traditional publishing contract; they recognise that an agent or commissioning editor is more likely to choose a manuscript for a new novel which is in a near-finished state than one that needs more work. Finding an editor whose skillset is the best match for your own is not always easy. Recommendations are a good place to start, and it’s also worth approaching editors who work with authors in the same genre as you, in order to narrow it down. Check out author testimonials on editors’ websites and, if you’re seriously considering their services, ask to be put in touch with one or two authors they quote, as well as studying that sample edit suggested above.

Multiple edits

A single developmental edit isn’t usually the only one that’s required. Once a novel has been edited and passed back to the author, it’s their turn to make changes (necessary even if they’ve received a hands-on edit, as the author needs to approve the changes the editor made and perhaps react to requests for additional material); then those revisions need to be looked at in turn. Sometimes the process is complete after two edits, but occasionally a novel will go to a third edit or more, and authors need to be prepared for that. The same is true for copy-edits; if you’ve made any revision after the copy-editor returned the manuscript to you (and almost certainly you will have done so, because you’ve been asked to), then it should revert to the copy-editor for a final or penultimate pass.

Where a writer is paying for the editing themselves, that has cost implications. Many writers forget to budget for this. Very often an editor won’t charge as much for subsequent revisions (editing is often charged at a rate per 1,000 words) but, even so, cost is going to be a major consideration. Which brings us to reasons why it’s good to self-edit.