If you click on this link, you’ll see much of what I did for the month of January. My main project was editing A Facet for the Gem, the first in a series by Charles L. Murray.
Within a few hours of my returning the edited file to him, Charles made a lovely public post about the process of working with me and the kinds of things I found, which of course I’d find for any of my clients. (It’s what I pride myself on. It’s not only about grammar and usage and mechanics. It’s about style and facts and physics and history and culture and yeah.)
I linked to that collection back in December as “Clients in the Hot Seat,” but these posts weren’t there yet. Charles is so pleased, and I had such a good time working with him, I wanted to be sure to share this for those of you who might still be wondering what it’s like to work with me. (You can get a feel for how it would be to work with any professional editor, to a point, but keep in mind we all have our own methods, strengths, and weaknesses.)
Fair warning: I’m quickly filling every open slot left on my schedule. Don’t hesitate to ask, but be ready for an “I’m sorry.” If your project is over 80,000 words, I probably won’t have time this year.
And I do mean “this year,” as in 2016. I went from not knowing what I’d be working on after June to ZOMG WAT WAIT in the space of 24 hours last week.
Still, it’s always worth asking.
The collection I think is most helpful to writers looking for an editor is the one I call Broad Daylight Editing.
The purpose is to show potential clients (often new indie writers) what it’s like to work with me as a professional editor. With a client’s permission, I bring questions “into the daylight” so others can see what I look at when I’m working on a project, how I ask my clients the pertinent questions, and what kind of feedback I expect from them as well as what kind I provide.
The drawback is: Readers often feel the need to answer my questions themselves. I’m not asking for input from readers of the collection. I’m asking specifically for the author’s responses. No one else’s opinion matters to me: only my client’s words make a difference. Some folks get huffy when I remind them of the collection’s focus. Oh well, kids — it’s not about you. It’s about my process and my interactions with a specific client on a specific project, and it’s there to show folks what it’s like to work with me.
It ain’t about you, unless you’re the client in the hot seat.
And I can say that this collection has netted me some new clients, so apparently it’s workin’.
Tomorrow: Homophone Hell.
If you follow me over at G+, you might know that I’ve recently embraced the new Collections feature.
I’m gradually moving all of my relevant posts into appropriate collections, like “Broad Daylight Editing,” “GUMmy Stuff: Grammar, Usage, Mechanics,” and “Why I Edit (And Why You Might Hire Me).” Most of what I post over there has some relevance to some facet of editing, and I’m finding I have a LOT of content to sort through. It’s a good thing I made liberal use of hashtags like #GramrgednBasics, #MorningMechanics, and #RealEditorsProofBetter; that makes it pretty simple to find what I need to move.
I also have a GRAMMARGEDDON! collection, just for posts from here. I always posted a link there when I put up a new post here; now, that’s all automated thanks to Jetpack (the WP plugin) for self-hosted sites. Once I post this, I can go over there, find the post, and reshare it to the appropriate collection. Easy peasy, as they say.
I hope that folks will follow me here AND at G+. A lot of what I post there are one-offs that wouldn’t make good blog posts, to my way of thinking, because they’re not deep enough. Which reminds me: I need to create a #HomophoneHell collection! ::cackles::
All right, then. I’ve told you what I needed to tell you. I’ll see you around, I’m sure.