Editors and Authors:

Collaborative Friends or Obligatory Colleagues

Alisa Hulme
Brigham Young University

Submitted to Kimberly May

English 316
August 8, 2017
 Editors and Authors:
Collaborative Friends or Obligatory Colleagues

Alisa Hulme
Brigham Young University

Submitted to Kimberly May

English 316
August 8, 2017

Abstract

The relationship between authors and editors is crucial in the publication process. While both
parties have relatively defined responsibilities, there is a multiplicity of ways that these roles are
put into effect within the partnership. This literature review will focus on fictional novels. The
research provided will synthesize a variety of opinions and experiences relating to both the
relationship and collaboration of editors and authors. The review will also suggest the most
useful methods in selecting an author or editor and how best to foster those relationships to
provide a successful publication.

Contents

1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..1
2. Relationship…………………………………………………………………………......1-3
a. Close Friendship…………………………………………………………….…..1-2
b. Purely Professional………………………………………………………………..2
c. Hierarchy v. Equality…………………………………………………………....2-3
3. Collaboration……………………………………………………………………………3-4
a. Significant Editing………………………………………………………………3-4
b. Limited Editing……………………………………………………………............4
4. Selection………………………………………………………………………………...4-5
a. Note to Editors…………………………………………………………………….5
b. Note to Authors……………………………………………………………………5
5. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………...5
6. References………………………………………………………………………………....6

I. Introduction
Authors and editors both have unique and
specific roles in the process of publishing
literature. Elsie Stainton, a managing editor
of Cornell University Press, explains the
basic function of each of these parties when
she states, “Editors are concerned that
writers should be saying what they mean;
writers must be concerned that they mean
what they are saying” [1]. Both roles serve
as a pivotal component of the writing
process. Therefore, the publication of good
literature depends on a successful
relationship between authors and editors.
Without the collaboration between these
two parties, the writing, revision, and
publication processes would cease to
function and produce meaningful works.
The relationship between editors and
authors, though, is relatively complex.
Ranging from close partnerships to sharp
feuds, authors and editors work together to
accomplish a plethora of matters such as:
technical issues (grammar, punctuation),
legal issues (copyright, contracts), aesthetic
issues (tone, pacing), and intrapersonal
issues [2]. Within these categories,
however, there is a blurred line as to what
responsibilities and to what extent those
responsibilities should be performed by each
party.
Many authors have claimed that hiring a
good editor is not only necessary, but one of
the best investments an author can make,
fostering that relationship into something
productive and positive is pivotal [3]. Every
author/editor relationship is not the same,
however. Thus, it is instructive to explore a
variety of philosophies, experiences, and
practices to best determine which way will
be the most beneficial for each individual
and situation.
1
While the roles of editors and authors may
seem straightforward, there is significant
variance in the understanding and
application of their roles, specifically in
relation to each other. This literature review
will focus specifically on the relations,
contradictions, and inconsistencies in beliefs
and practices regarding the roles of both
parties. The purpose of this review is to
provide a more complete understanding of
the connection between editors and authors
of fiction as well as the most ideal practices
when establishing a successful working
relationship between the two parties. The
discussion will synthesize a variety of
opinions and experiences relating to first,
the relationship and second, the
collaboration of editors and authors. In
conclusion, the review will discuss the best
methods in selecting an editor and author.
II. Relationship
Some authors and editors make it a practice
to never socialize with each other while
others build strong friendships [4]. Among
the most heavily debated issues is what the
nature of this author/editor personal
relationship should be.
A. Close Friendship
Some editors and authors are keen on
creating deep bonds of friendship with their
working partners, sharing intimate moments
throughout the book-writing process and
without. Kait Felman, editor for Pam
Munez Ryan, describes Pam as “warm” and
“engaging.” Kait claims that the
relationship they have formed allows her, as
an editor, to be comfortable offering
suggestions and helps her to look forward to

each interaction that they are able to have in
the writing process [5]. Not only does this
type of friendship lend itself to a more
comfortable, desirable working
environment, many editors, such as Kait, say
that it improves their effectiveness. One
editor recounts that, following a particularly
moving reading of a passage, he rushed over
to hug the author. Referring to this editor as
a “friend,” the author noted that the hug was
the “best editorial note he’d ever received”
[5]. These tight-knit pairs would argue that
their closeness brings together a more
successful end product. In general, close
relationships are not uncommon among
co-workers. Many authors and editors agree
with this idea and adhere to its implications.
B. Purely Professional
Conversely, other author/editor partnerships,
are resolved to never get personally
involved. They claim that the close
relationship hinders their ability to work
professionally, be self-serving, and offer
harsh critiques [4]. Because editors and
authors tend to have a more intertwined
interaction than average co-workers, many
would argue that special precautions or
regulations should be established regarding
their relationship. In his article,
“Something Like Marriage and Serious
Head Banging,” Hinnefeld explains that a
good editor is “methodical and merciless”
when rejecting or filtering out unsatisfactory
material, yet compassionate in striving to
adhere to the author’s original intentions.
He describes the relationship between an
editor and author as an “uneasy alliance”
[6]. For this reason, partnerships with a
more strictly professional standpoint would
say that distance is key. An example of this
is when Roald Dahl’s editor begrudgingly
took on the task of writing Dahl’s
2
biography. The closeness that ensued,
unfortunately, created a rift between the pair
that ultimately ended their working
relationship [7]. In this case, the personal
relationship that the author and editor had
formed negatively affected their professional
relationship.
C. Hierarchy v. Equality
Once the nature of the personal relationship
has been established, the pair must then
determine the hierarchy by which they’ll
function. Much of the research shows a good
sense of intended equality between the
author and the editor. Multiple editors
recounted experiences where their authors
started their partnership specifically on
“equal footing” [5]. Andrea Tompa, editor
for novelist Kate DiCamillo, explained their
relationship as being similar to a
superhero/sidekick dynamic [8]. In both of
these types of relationships, both parties
would ideally be valued for their different
but equivalent contributions to the team.
However, various impediments occasionally
make this equality a difficult reality to
accomplish. One editor points out that, his
relationship with his author is more of a
teacher-student situation [5]. Depending on
the experience of each party, a sort of
mentorship might be inevitable. In addition,
a second barrier to equality is often a sense
of ownership or pride on the part of one or
both parties. Deirdre Rowell, a
distinguished author, notes that his editor
was the equivalent of his boss. He explains
that the author tends to bend to the style of
the editor. Similarly, another author states,
“I’m unsure of my authority, for though I
have shaped these books in significant ways,
I didn’t design the project” [6]. While these
examples demonstrate a more dictatorial
editor, many authors deal with a similar

power struggle. One editor explains that,
within a month of beginning a project with
an author, he handed in his notice. This
editor argued that he was “fed up” with the
author’s mentality and left to start writing
himself [9]. For many, it seems wrong to
have such a discrepancy between the authors
and editors. However, many partnerships
have formed a working relationship that
fosters and succeeds with that type of
cooperation.
III. Collaboration
In order to determine the magnitude of both
the author and the editor’s roles, the nature
of their collaboration must be decided. The
scale of how involved an editor is with a
piece is large. Some authors, like Dreiser,
thrive on receiving critique from not only
his editors, but from his trusted family and
friends. Hemingway and Fitzgerald sought
help, but only from a select few. And, for
Faulkner, he wanted little to do with the
collaborative process [10]. While none of
these options are particularly bad, it’s
interesting to compare the inconsistencies in
the approaches.
A. Significant Editing
Many advocates of extensive editing argue
that writers are too engrossed in the work to
have an objective eye [10]. In order for
editors to help authors resolve this
shortcoming, the editors need to be more
heavily involved in the project. In the book
Coaching Writers​, Roy Clark and Don Fry
explain “the human side of editing.” They
claim that editors can only bring out the best
in their authors when the two are working
together on multiple stages of the writing
process, rather than just fixing mistakes on
3
the final drafts [11]. By being involved in
all of the writing stages, editors are able to
help the book take a positive form from the
beginning and can mold it as a successful
work throughout the process. In addition,
significant interaction with the text allows
editors to check for grammatical and
structural errors for multiple drafts, ensuring
a more error-free final product.
Not only does an editor offer critique, they
also act as a support system and soundboard
throughout the creative process. For
example, the exercise of an editor
articulating concerns to an author prompts
the author to discuss ideas and formulate
them in the most productive manner [4].
Sindiwe Magona, an author, explains that
her editor saves her a lot of time and energy.
The approval of the editor keeps her on the
right track, allowing the project to move
forward with limited shortcomings [6].
Relying heavily on an editor permits the
author to push forward creatively with the
realization that there is a safety net in place.
To some degree, editors are also forced to
keep in mind the business side of a book
project. Polk, the editor for “All the King’s
Men” explains, “Commercial editors must,
at some level, consider the books as
marketable commodities...no matter how
committed to the higher reaches of art the
writer, the editors, and even the publishing
houses are” [10]. Having this kind of
mindset often affects the sorts of changes
that editors make. Editors must be
conscious in striving to adhere to the needs
of their publishing company, which has a
firm grip on the demands of the readers and
the book market as a whole. Elsie Stainton
in her book, ​Author and Editor at Work​,
explains that the publishing process touches
on everything that an editor does.
Sometimes, an author would prefer to

continue working on a piece to perfect it, but
the publishing company does not have the
resources to expand the magnitude of the
project [1]. While quality should always be
the goal of an editor, their ultimate goal is
getting a quality publication. This mindset
requires business to be on the forefront of an
editor’s mind. Some authors disagree with
this business-minded mentality, claiming
that it takes away from their art. However,
without these sorts of guidelines in mind,
books would rarely be published. Editors
are necessary to ensure that projects have
the qualifications to go out on the market.
B. Limited Editing
Other authors would argue, however, that
excessive editing redefines the nature of the
entire piece. Polk ​explains that editors often
have “esthetic sensibilities” that come in
conflict against the author’s. In addition,
editors also make changes to conform to a
publisher’s house style, to condense a work,
or to simply change a grammatical issue
[10]. Many editors see themselves as the
“watchdogs” for the English language [12].
However, authors tend to have specific
styles of punctuation, phrasing, and
language that are distinct and intentional.
These editing mentalities can result in an
excess of edits and unnecessary changes that
impact the overall reading. Whether editors
are aware of it or not, the changes they make
could change the meaning of the book from
the author’s original intent. Douglas
Wieringa explains that editors should not
make any changes to a text unless they are
certain that such changes will be an
improvement for the readers. In addition, he
remarks that editors must be very conscious
to not make changes based on their personal
preferences [12]. Unfortunately, adhering to
this criteria and ignoring biases, is not an
easy task. For this reason, editors can often
4
overstep their boundaries when going
through a piece.
Furthermore, editors can make the mistake
of overlooking good writers as a whole.
Many works have recently been
rediscovered after being rejected by original
editors. As a result, some authors question
the legitimacy of editor opinions altogether
[13]. Authors, especially those who have
been overlooked by editors in the past, have
a difficult time trusting in the opinions of
editors as a whole.
Even if an author has trust enough to hire an
editor, many prefer to remain in complete
control of their work. One editor explained
that his interaction with his author consisted
of no more than a brief meeting every
couple months. During these interactions,
the editor would give the author limited
feedback, followed by several months of
silence where the author would continue
working. This editor describes his
experience as just being “along for the ride”
[14]. With such a variance in expectations
for editors, it’s important to find the right
author/editor match and set the desired
expectations.
IV. Selection
The changing market in today’s world
allows the cooperation between editors and
authors to be easier than ever before [3].
With an increase in communication,
especially digitally, the options for finding a
good partnership are endless. The
techniques for those looking for an editor
and those looking for an author differ
slightly.

A. Note to Editors
The first step for an editor is to build
credentials. Good editors must have a firm
understanding of the language and hone in
their editing skills before they can expect to
be taken seriously by an author. Elsie
Stainton explains that a good editor needs to
be “strict, picayune, patient, diplomatic,
respectful, exacting, scrupulous, critical,
knowledgeable, tolerant, sympathetic, and
enthusiastic” [1]. These skills come from
concerted effort as well as hands-on
experience.
Once an editor has gained the necessary
credentials, the main course of action for a
successful editor is to network. Editors
should build a strong reputation and
specialize in an area they are interested in
[15]. By establishing a name in the editing
world, an editor will more likely be
respected, desired, and worked with by
authors. While it’s important to take on
projects and get experience, editors should
also be wary about which pieces they decide
to take on. Authors frequently review an
editor’s previous work before hiring [3].
The more prestigious and successful a
resume, the more likely an editor will get
chosen for meaningful projects.
B. Note to Authors
For authors to select an editor, they must
first determine what their intentions as an
author are. Some authors want extensive
substantive and copy editing; they want a
collaborative partner to help guide them
through the writing process. Other authors
simply want a quick, copy editing
run-through at the end of the project [16].
Through an author initiating the selection
process by personally defining what they are
looking for, they will be able to narrow
5
down the available options and single in on
those editors who will most closely fulfill
their desires.
Once that decision has been made, the
author should find out who’s who in the
editing world, study the editor’s previous
work, meet the editor, pitch the project, and
set forth expectations [17]. As it is
frequently the author who seeks out an
editor and publishing company, it is the
author’s responsibility to do the adequate
research to find a good fit before committing
to the partnership. Ultimately, the roles that
both the author and editor play are purely
dependent on their working relationship.
V. Conclusion
A positive working relationship between
editors and authors is pivotal in the
publication of successful literature. While
there is no set guideline as to how this
relationship should operate, there are
multiple factors that should be considered
when the partnership is being formed. By
having a more complete picture of the
connection between editors and authors, as
well as the most ideal practices when
establishing a working relationship between
the two, both editors and authors will be
more successful in building their desired
partnerships. In addition, initial guidelines
for choosing these partnerships can help set
the framework for a positive working
relationship in the future.
 6

References
[1] E. M. Stainton, ​Author and Editor at
Work​. University of Toronto Press, 1982.
[2] T. H. Wheeler, “Instructional Objectives
and the Writer-Editor Relationship,”
Journalism Educator, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 4–8,
1993.
[3] J. McCartney, "Indie Authors Talk
Editors", Publisher's Weekly, vol. 261, no.
30, pp. 36-38, 2014.
[4] H. S. Nathans, “Productive Partnership:
Author-Editor Collaborations,” The Journal
of the American Society for Theatre
Research, vol. 53.2, pp. 289–292, 2012.
[11] Clark, Roy Peter., and Don Fry.
Coaching Writers: Editors and Reporters
Working Together​. St. Martin's Press, 1992.
[12] D. Wieringa, “Editors, Authors, and
Audiences,” Technical Communication, vol.
42.1, 1995.
[13] V. Ferrari, "An Editor's Place",
Publisher's Weekly, vol. 260, no. 50, p. 72,
2013.
[14] D. Stevenson, "David Wiesner", Horn
Book Magazine, vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 351-353,
2007.
[15] R. Whitaker, Personal Interview, 2017.

[5] M. Frey, "Pinch Me, I'm Dreaming", [16] A. Peltier, "How to select the right
Publishers Weekly, vol. 263, no. 49, pp. freelance editor", Kalmback Publishing
6-10, 2016. Company, vol. 122, no. 4, pp. 38-39, 2009.

[6] J. Hinnefeld, “"Something Like
Marriage" and "Serious Head Banging":
Writers, Editors, and the Social Nature of
Writing,” English in Texas, vol. 26, no. 2,
pp. 34–40, 1994.
[17] P. Werner, "Connect with the Right
Editor: 7 ways to focus your search for a
book editor and increase your odds of
publishing success", Kalmbach Publishing,
vol. 119, no. 4, pp. 44-45, 2006.

[7] S. Roxburgh, "Three Cheers for

Trouble", Horn Book Magazine, vol. 85, no.
5, pp. 493-497, 2009.

[8] A. Tompa, "Kate DiCamillo", Horn

Book Magazine, vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 53-55,
2014.

[9] R. Margolis, "I Dream of Djinni", School

Library Journal, vol. 52, no. 1, p. 45, 2006.

[10] N. Polk, "Editing All the King's Men",

Southern Review, vol. 38, no. 4, p. 849,
2002.