Editing & Beta Reading

EDITING & BETA-READING 

1 - spacing 

Editors and proof-readers have to read a lot, more than most normal people. We need it double-spaced. It makes it easier to read than a barrage of condensed words. Please double-space it. Make your work easy for people to read.

2 - alignment 

Likewise alignment, justification. If your word processor cannot justify it to have the text straight down along both the left and the right margins, it is a bad word processor. Stop using it and get one which can do this function. 

For example: SL notecards do not have this desirable feature. Newspapers always use the format. 

While it looks pretty with words lapping like waves at the sea-shore along the right margin, this is improperly aligned. It is no longer the industry standard practice because it makes it more difficult to read. 

3 - typeface

It is not publicly advertised which fonts to use for the industry standard or it will become more confusing for professionals to sift newcomers from seasoned hacks. Use a typeface which makes it easy to read. Anything which is too difficult to read will not be accepted. This is not the graphic design industry where a million different typefaces are necessary. If you are not sure, use something which looks professional. 

The above are the main three points any editor looks at even before reading the words. The presentation of the words. How easy they are to read. Following are three more points which Editors have to deal with regularly enough they deserve comment. 

4 - arguing

When you argue with an editor it causes annoyance for someone who is trying to do you a favor. A good editor will explain their reasoning, why they suggest specific improvements. You will see from that how much they care about the manuscript and what their experience is. 

Take their advice as it is intended; to increase the chance of your work getting anywhere by improving it up to a quality standard, 

that of literature (‘of being literate’) and 

that of commerce ('goods of value'). 

Although you naturally feel defensive of your work, ask yourself why would any editor waste time criticizing you personally? It is about making the best quality product possible. This is 100% the focus. If an editor does not explain their constructive criticism, either they are a bad editor or they are too busy to mess about, which is their bad and is also why editors sometimes delay responding to you. 

Remember; different editors will have different approaches to what works regarding editing, style etc depending on their background. Ultimately it is your work, you are the final decision maker. 

5 - grammar bots

Automated Grammar Checkers. There is not one famous work of literature which would pass as 'proper writing' if you use these tools on it. The wonder of language is how unique the storytellers voice. If you want to sound like a robot, use grammar correctors. It's lazy. You will not ever master writing if you rely on a computer to make it average. 

6 - AI 

AI is not writing. Some lazy writers claim AI is useful for structuring manuscripts. It will always require an extensive re-write. The grammar structure and repeat-style phrases used by AI is revealing, annoying and bland. Its rhythm is unique and identifiable. It is very obvious when AI has been used to generate writing. As an editor, when someone sends me AI generated writing, I put it in the bin where it belongs.