Why Authors Need Editors

The question comes up once in a while, on Twitter or Reddit, do authors need editors? As both a writer and editor myself, I have some thoughts on the topic. This isn’t an uncommon overlap; while not every writer enjoys editing, or vice versa, there are a lot of people who can get a kick out of either creating or critiquing words. No matter how much I enjoy both writing and editing though, and no matter how much I trust my skills in both areas, there is no way I’ll be putting my own book out into the world without passing through at least one formal editing process with an editor who isn’t me.

I know not every author feels this way. I’ve come across plenty of people who believe self-editing is the best move, and advise others to do the same. I’m not here to tell them that they’re all wrong—I’m sure there are authors out there who can edit their own work to a high standard. But I do feel pretty strongly that most of them are wrong.

Getting some informal feedback can be enormously useful too! But if you want to produce the best piece of writing you possibly can, I believe that you need to get another set of eyes on it in an at least somewhat professional capacity. But enough of talking about what I think writers should do, let’s talk about the reasons why. Why do authors need editors? I have three main arguments.

1. You know your own work too well

This is a massive issue, and it manifests in a few ways as you try to review your writing. For one thing, you know on some level what you wrote and therefore what you are expecting to see, so you’re far less likely to spot typos or jumbled up sentences when reading your own writing back than if somebody else reads it for you. Case in point; I always read through my blog posts at least a couple of times, start to finish, before I upload them. But I reckon at least one post in three I’ll get a text from my mum a few hours after posting to point out a mistake that I still managed to miss. (Thanks mum!)

Another problem with your knowledge of your writing is that you have all the backstory in your head. Things in your writing will, by and large, make sense to you because they came out of your head. It’s incredibly difficult to put that background knowledge aside and take an impartial look at whether the events, history, character development (and so on) in your work are credible to a new reader. An editor, a good one at least, is able to not highlight issues like this. Not just that, but they can work with you to pinpoint where problems are and come up with possible solutions.

2. You like your own work too much

The advice to “murder your darlings” can be controversial, but sometimes you’ve just got to do it. I’ve lost count of the number of books I’ve read where good writing is held back by an author’s obvious inability to let go of things that a decent editor would have had them strip out. Excessive description, dialogue that goes on for days, characters who don’t add anything except an occasional cool quip. Creating can be difficult, and I totally understand the temptation to hold onto things you’re proud of in your work! That’s why I don’t trust myself as an impartial judge of what needs to go before the final draft.

Unfortunately, how much you love something in your writing is not the best indicator of whether it enhances the story. Authors need editors to be clear on what’s actually adding value to the work, and what should be cut.

3. You don’t like your own work enough

I know, I know, this directly contradicts point two. Bear with me. Authors can be a self-critical bunch, and the process of rigorously critiquing your own work can easily veer away from useful and become demoralising. This will affect some people more than others, I know. But if you’re in the camp of authors who find themselves starting to kind of hate their work after staring at it for too long and combing for errors, an editor can be a useful buffer. A professional editor can keep the focus on drawing out the best of your work. They help you not to fixate on what’s wrong with it—which can so easily become your mindset when you’ve been trying to edit your own work for too long.

So, what, don’t even bother with self-editing?

That’s not entirely what I’m saying. Self-editing is a valuable tool, and a necessary part of the process when refining your writing through different drafts. Chances are you can catch a lot of mistakes through careful re-reading, and it’s good practice for future writing to work on pruning your writing of any elements that are getting in the way of the story you’re telling. A thorough self-edit, or even a few rounds of self-editing, might well get you a strong piece of writing. But I would maintain that, however strong your editing skills are, you’re too close to your own writing to do as good a job with it as you would editing somebody else’s work. For any writer to produce the best work they can, I think they need an editor.

Do you agree that authors need editors?

Do you think people should edit their own work, because the author knows best what the finished product should look like? Or do you agree that authors need somebody else to pitch in with editing for the best possible result? Let me know in the comments!