I’ve seen a lot of confusion about different kinds of editing. The most common misconception involves proofreading and copyediting (or copy-line).
I cannot stress this enough. A proofread is not an edit and has almost nothing in common with an edit (though an edit may tangentially look at spelling). Proofreading does not deal with the content, whether it’s logically organized, cohesive, or interesting to read. It doesn’t care if the work is repetitious or boring, or filled with jargon and inconsistencies. Proofreading focuses on accuracy. It cares about:
That’s it.
Did you notice any mention of making your sentences pretty? No. As soon as you’ve moved from fixing errors to rewriting the sentence to make it pretty, you’ve crossed over into copyediting.
Proofreading cares about errors. It does not care about turning you into the next <insert bestselling/award-winning author in your genre here>. Proofreading is fact-based and focused on fixing mechanical problems.
We save it for last because there’s no point to making sure there are no errors if you’re going to change everything anyway.
A good proofread is absolutely crucial to your work. A book that looks like a mess, and is filled with typos and formatting problems, immediately destroys the author’s credibility as well as reader interest. No edit can replace a final proofread.
Crucial to a proofread is that it is what’s known as a cold read. That means the proof editor hasn’t read your work before. And that means your proof editor should not be the same person as your editor or writing coach. After a while, our brains simply see what we want to have written, not what we actually wrote. This applies to the editor as much as the writer.
If you want anything more than what I’ve just described, you probably want copyediting. You can get the whole rundown of what that entails here.
Unlike proofreading, copyediting does care if your content is logically organized, cohesive, or interesting to read. Copyediting cares, a lot.
One of the big reasons copyediting and proofreading can be confused is that copyeditors tend to correct spelling and other errors they find. However, their purview goes well beyond this.
Basically, copyediting includes what most people think about when they think about editing, and then some.
Copyediting is a collaborative relationship. While your proofreader shouldn’t need to check in with you, your copyeditor definitely will. This means that you have the opportunity, and will probably be encouraged, to make changes after the copyedit. There should be zero changes after a proofread.
Copyediting cares about content. Proofreading cares about looks. The two are different, and this is also why one will cost you more than the other. However, neither one will replace the other. I always, always recommend writers make use of both.
No. I don’t personally proofread. However, if you and I are working together on editing, I’ve got you covered.
I work with several excellent proof editors, all delightful humans who are very, very good at what they do. This means you get an editorial team looking after your work, holding each other accountable and educating each other, and you.
I can’t, in good conscience, recommend that any manuscript proceed to publication with only a proof review. There is no reason for you to do a proof unless and until you’ve already worked through the developmental and copy-line process. You aren’t doing yourself or your book any favors, and it hurts my heart when writers don’t want to see this. If a proofread is all you are looking for, I recommend you seek out a dedicated proofreader to assist you.
Complete the form below and schedule a complimentary 20-minute consultation.