Learning Something New Every Day

Before my mom retired, she always used to joke that she learned something new every day. When I was younger, I used to dread the idea of learning something new every day because I thought that meant I would never truly be an expert in my field. It’s only now that I’ve started freelance editing that I understand the value of being in a constant state of learning (and that it doesn’t mean you’re not an expert).

I’ve seen some freelance editors on social media judging others for not knowing certain things about editing. “If you’re qualified to edit, you really should know X, Y, and Z.” And while this is true to some extent, I hate to think what editors would become if we all adopted this mentality. We wouldn’t be very good editors, that’s for sure.

Even the best editors should learn something new, if not every day, then at least frequently. I’ve always had a pretty good grasp of English phrases and idioms, but when I first started taking editing classes, I was shocked to find out that the correct phrase is “homing in,” not “honing in.” Even now, more than a year after I first made the decision to pursue editing as a career, I find myself learning new things.

On top of that, editors who have a mentality of constantly learning are just…better editors in my opinion. The editors who don’t want to learn are the ones who give us a bad rap. Having an open mind is not only cohesive to editing, it’s important in life in general. Not to mention that it allows us to connect with writers more deeply, since we’re open to new ideas or information.

So, I suppose I should apologize to my mom for rolling my eyes every time she said she learned something new at her job. It turns out I’d end up adopting the same mindset in my own career.

Choosing a Niche in Freelance Editing

In the editing and writing world, people often ask editors what their niche or specialty is. As a person who is constantly interested in learning, finding the right niche was challenging. Thankfully, there were many experienced and wise editors who encouraged me not to limit myself by focusing too much on a specialty.

Now that I’ve actually had opportunities to work with more writers, I feel much more comfortable in saying my niche is developmental editing speculative fiction. Although that is somewhat of a broad niche, it allows me to work on so many different kinds of projects, which is one thing I love about my job. I enjoy working across age ranges and working with authors who include diverse representation in their work.

That being said, I also feel like I have the freedom to explore other interests without abandoning my specialty. I marvel all the time about the joy I find working with the amazing, kind, and talented people I get to work with. It sounds cheesy to say, but my work doesn’t feel like work. When others joke about retiring, I daydream about never retiring.

But, just as I do in my personal life, I hope to continue learning about different topics related to editing. I’m hoping to explore proofreading in the near-ish future, and I’d love to narrate children’s audiobooks someday. And the nerd in me would love to work on more philosophical pieces. Until then, I’m content specializing in the area I do, knowing that my niche doesn’t hold me back from new opportunities.

Whose Book is it?

One topic that has come up over and over again in the book community is the question of who a book belongs to, who authors write books for. It seems the most popular response to this question is “readers,” but I think we should challenge this idea. I’ve had instructors, mentors, writers, and other editors say that a book is, first and foremost, for the reader, but the more I talk and think about this topic, I’m not so sure the answer is clearcut.

So, if an author isn’t writing for their readers, who are they writing for? Well, I’d say that they’re writing for themselves. Of course, they have potential readers in mind when writing, and editors should advocate for their readers as well. But at the end of the day, everyone who writes does so because they have a story within them, a story they want to share with others. And if they didn’t write for themselves before anyone else, then they wouldn’t have a meaningful story at all.

If authors only wrote for readers, the stories they create would be two-dimensional and insincere. I’d argue that readers can tell when an author wrote a book according to what they think readers would want as opposed to telling the story inside their heart.

What does this mean for writers? Well, I often hear writers worrying that they’re putting too much of themselves into their stories, either by making a character too similar to them or in some other manner. While this is typically solid advice, I think the writing community sometimes takes this more seriously than we should. In fact, at times the best thing a writer can do for their story is to add more of themselves to it.

I’m not saying that writers should flip to the other extreme and put all of themselves into every story, but I think it’s important to recognize when a story could benefit from adding more of the writer into it. And I certainly think we should normalize the idea that writers are writing for themselves first.

My best piece of advice on the topic: Write for yourself first. Worry about writing for the reader during revisions or during the editing process.