Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil_liS
As a reader I don't have a problem with that, in fact I don't think that there should be an editor in the first place. If you aren't good enough to write a compelling story to begin with, why should you expect to make a living out of writing?
|
Because writing is a process. What I write now is better than what I wrote 10 years ago. I did not learn in a vacuum. I had helpful editors and people who critiqued--some of them were pros who received my manuscript and felt it had enough promise to offer me comments--but not a sale. Many authors get better over time, but most of us get better because we get feedback. A good editor (and there are plot editors, copyeditors and so on) has a wealth of talent--not only do they understand good plots, they are well-read in SEVERAL genres. So they know an over-used trope. They also know a unique spin. They can spot lazy writing and nudge a writer to improve or make a scene dynamic.
It's not to say an editor is absolutely necessary--but a good editor or even a good beta reader is a special talent. The right person can really help a writer (like a coach) reach for that next level.
I've been fortunate to have had a beta reader say, "You know this is a good ending, but. I think it could be more." It was a good ending. But that comment pushed me to think about how to make it a great one.
No, we aren't all going to get that and not with every story. But don't think editors out there are just sitting there being gatekeepers. The good ones do a heck of a lot more.