In a recent blog post, we asked writer Li Robbins about the art of the interview. This week we ask Jordan Whitehouse about the value of editors and how to select a good one for your publication or project.
Adam: Jordan, what do you think makes a good editor?
Jordan: I read somewhere once that a good editor is like a good meatloaf. There are lots of different kinds, but they can all get the nourishment job done. Still, beyond having an eye for the mechanics of writing, I think solid editors have a couple of common ingredients. One is their ability to understand how difficult the writing process can be. Showing that to writers can go a long way to softening the blow of tough edits. Another is being decisive with the edits you make. The editing process should be collaborative, but you have to have the confidence to make a final call.
Adam: How should an organization evaluate an editor and their work?
Jordan: A good place to start is just by comparing the original, unedited versions of the writing with the edited versions. It's usually obvious if the editor made the work better or worse. One key question to keep in mind when doing this: Do the edited versions communicate the messages to your audience in the way you want them communicated? You can also ask multiple people in the organization to evaluate the editor. Judging an editor's choices can be subjective, but if there is consensus among different people, that can help clear up confusion. If it's still not clear, consider consulting an experienced editor to make a call.
Adam: You are also a successful writer. How does this play into your editing?
Jordan: "Successful" is debatable, but I definitely think that being a writer does help with editing. It goes back to that first question. Knowing how difficult the writing process can be really helps me empathize with writers and communicate my edit requests with delicacy. I also think that seeing a work with "writer eyes" helps me slow down and try to understand why a writer made a particular choice. The writer usually spends a lot more time with the work than the editor, and so some of those choices may not be immediately obvious.
Adam: What do you find is the biggest challenge in editing someone's work?
Jordan: There are lots of challenges, but the biggest is always trying to balance what I think the work needs with keeping the writer's voice intact.
Adam: How do you manage giving critical feedback?
Jordan: That's another big challenge, but doing it respectfully tends to come naturally if you've built up that capacity to empathize. With a substantive edit note, I always begin with detailing what the writer did well, followed by what could be improved, and ending on what I think the positive result will be if that good stuff is combined with the edits. With a copy or line edit, it can help if I frame at least some of my edit requests as questions. This can help make the editing process feel more collaborative, which it should be anyway.
Adam: What are the three most common grammatical errors you see?
Jordan: In no particular order:
1. Comma usage.
2. Subject-verb agreement.
3. Run-on sentences.
Adam: What errors do you see in mainstream publications that drive you crazy?
Jordan: It's usually blatant spelling errors, especially ones in headlines. One of my favourites was this gem from the Associated Press:"Missippi's literacy program shows improvement". But I also shake my head when I see errors related to simple homophones like "your/you're" and "there/their/they're".
Adam: Thanks, Jordan. This has been really helpful.
Bio: Jordan Whitehouse is an award-winning freelance journalist, copywriter, and editor who has worked with a wide range of clients over the past decade, including The Globe and Mail, HarperCollins Canada, and Queen's University.
Website: jordanwhitehouse.com
