Qualities of a Great Editor

Everybody needs an editor. As a developmental editor myself, you might expect me to say that. Fair enough. But what if I told you about my editor, would that enhance my credibility?

My editor is someone who gets me.

That is the first quality your editor must have. Not only does she get me, she gets how good I can be. Some of this may be my idealization of her, which is the second quality an editor should have: capable of being idealized. Not like we don’t have our fights, but when we do, they are about the work, not something stupid.

My editor wants me to do my very best.

She is committed to that outcome, and often I have to remember this when I get back my drafts from her covered in blue deletions and yellow comments. My ego bristles! “I went to school for this,” I want to say to her. Or, “I was the one who told you that originally…”

When I do give into the temptation to object to some of her comments, my editor holds her ground. That is quality #4 for a great editor. This isn’t personal. And if it isn’t personal, why should she retract what she has to say? I don’t have to agree with it.

Sometimes, I don’t. There are places where I feel she is recommending I take out the best part—sometimes it has to do with the voice, I’m being too this, she wants me to be more that. Sometimes it has to do with what material should be presented where.

But in the end, a good editor accepts your freedom. That is the fifth and final identifying feature of a great editor.

Everyone wants to be heard. Everyone wants to have the intelligence of their ideas acknowledged, but a great editor can adopt a position of relative non-attachment to how a writer processes his or her critique. They can do this because they are living their own life.

Yes, an editor should be literate, available, interested in your subject matter, and reasonable (as people, and if you’re paying them, reasonably-priced). But I’m talking about finding a great editor here. A great editor for you.