https://blue.feedland.org/?river=http://data.feedland.org/blue/feeds/AndyH.xml It's just a feed for now Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:19:45 GMT feedland v0.5.59 https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:19:45 GMT AndyH Wed, October 4, 2023 9:19 AM EDT <p>Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!)</p> <p>One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example.</p> <p>I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea!</p> <p>The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US.</p> <p>In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide).</p> <p>It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life!</p> <p>Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy.</p> <p>All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent.</p> <p>I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as.</p> <p>And this is one stereotype that can cause harm.</p> <p>The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c**p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice).</p> <p>These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them!</p> <p>What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔</p> Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:19:45 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141547 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141547 Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!) One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example. I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea! The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US. In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide). It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life! Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy. All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent. I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as. And this is one stereotype that can cause harm. The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c\*\*p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice). These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them! What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔 <p>Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!)</p> <p>One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example.</p> <p>I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea!</p> <p>The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US.</p> <p>In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide).</p> <p>It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life!</p> <p>Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy.</p> <p>All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent.</p> <p>I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as.</p> <p>And this is one stereotype that can cause harm.</p> <p>The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c**p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice).</p> <p>These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them!</p> <p>What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔</p> Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:18:49 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141542 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141542 Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!) One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example. I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea! The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US. In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide). It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life! Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy. All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent. I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as. And this is one stereotype that can cause harm. The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c\*\*p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice). These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them! What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔 <p>Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!)</p> <p>One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example.</p> <p>I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea!</p> <p>The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US.</p> <p>In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide).</p> <p>It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life!</p> <p>Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy.</p> <p>All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent.</p> <p>I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as.</p> <p>And this is one stereotype that can cause harm.</p> <p>The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c**p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice).</p> <p>These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them!</p> <p>What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔</p> Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:18:39 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141541 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141541 Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!) One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example. I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea! The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US. In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide). It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life! Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy. All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent. I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as. And this is one stereotype that can cause harm. The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c\*\*p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice). These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them! What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔 <p>Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!)</p> <p>One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example.</p> <p>I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea!</p> <p>The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US.</p> <p>In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide).</p> <p>It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life!</p> <p>Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy.</p> <p>All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent.</p> <p>I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as.</p> <p>And this is one stereotype that can cause harm.</p> <p>The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c**p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice).</p> <p>These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them!</p> <p>What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔</p> Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:17:32 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141538 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141538 Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!) One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example. I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea! The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US. In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide). It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life! Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy. All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent. I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as. And this is one stereotype that can cause harm. The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c\*\*p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice). These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them! What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔 <p>Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!)</p> <p>One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example.</p> <p>I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea!</p> <p>The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US.</p> <p>In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide).</p> <p>It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life!</p> <p>Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy.</p> <p>All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent.</p> <p>I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as.</p> <p>And this is one stereotype that can cause harm.</p> <p>The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c**p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice).</p> <p>These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them!</p> <p>What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔</p> Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:15:55 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141537 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141537 Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!) One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example. I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea! The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US. In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide). It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life! Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy. All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent. I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as. And this is one stereotype that can cause harm. The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c\*\*p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice). These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them! What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔 <p>Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!)</p> <p>One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example.</p> <p>I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea!</p> <p>The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US.</p> <p>In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide).</p> <p>It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life!</p> <p>Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy.</p> <p>All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent.</p> <p>I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as.</p> <p>And this is one stereotype that can cause harm.</p> <p>The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c**p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice).</p> <p>These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them!</p> <p>What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔</p> Wed, 04 Oct 2023 13:12:45 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141530 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=141530 Creative Writing MFA programs ✍ (Sex Education spoiler alert!) One guilty pleasure of mine is that I love to follow stereotypes of creative writing programs in TV dramas. They often play into this idea of the struggling creative genius – take Jughead Jones in Riverdale, for example. I particularly like the new series of Sex Education because it parodies this idea! The working-class character Maeve wins a place on a prestigious Ivy League program in the US. In the course workshops, Maeve has to deal with pretentious digs and superiority complexes (e.g. the tutor calling Maeve’s writing “soapy” and “derivative”). Meanwhile, she consoles the tutor and gives him advice when his work is rejected from magazines like The New Yorker (please don’t mention their style guide). It’s parody, and it’s refreshing because a lot of it is true to life! Maeve holds her hopes high for an internship, but then loses out to an upper-class student whose dad donated several buildings to the university. Gone is her illusion that the system is a meritocracy. All the ego massaging, bitchiness, and elitism recreates this Romantic view of the writer as a special, unique individual who struggles with a craft grounded in their subconscious talent. I have news for you: Creative writing isn’t like that. Anyone can do it with enough practice and targeted feedback. There are rules to storytelling and you can learn them. Simple as. And this is one stereotype that can cause harm. The Romantic view can hold people back if they think they don’t have that talent, and it can lead to people submitting absolute c\*\*p if they are convinced they do have that gift (and haven’t put in the hours of practice). These stereotypes are everywhere in UK/US pop culture. When you can see them for what they are, they’re funny – but they can also do a lot of damage too, and I appreciate Sex Education for subverting them! What’s your take on these stereotypes? 🤔 <p>Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because:</p> <ol> <li><p>For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here.</p> </li> <li><p>For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc.</p> </li> <li><p>My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books!</p> </li> <li><p>Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently?</p> </li> <li><p>My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample!</p> </li> </ol> <p>And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality.</p> <p>And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.”</p> <p>I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me.</p> <p>Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way:</p> <ol> <li><p>If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed.</p> </li> <li><p>If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page.</p> </li> </ol> <p>Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them?</p> Mon, 02 Oct 2023 12:36:20 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139043 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139043 Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because: 1) For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here. 2) For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc. 3) My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books! 4) Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently? 5) My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample! And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality. And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.” I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me. Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way: 1) If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed. 2) If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page. Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them? <p>Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because:</p> <ol> <li><p>For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here.</p> </li> <li><p>For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc.</p> </li> <li><p>My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books!</p> </li> <li><p>Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently?</p> </li> <li><p>My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample!</p> </li> </ol> <p>And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality.</p> <p>And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.”</p> <p>I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me.</p> <p>Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way:</p> <ol> <li><p>If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed.</p> </li> <li><p>If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page.</p> </li> </ol> <p>Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them?</p> Mon, 02 Oct 2023 12:35:44 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139041 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139041 Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because: 1) For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here. 2) For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc. 3) My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books! 4) Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently? 5) My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample! And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality. And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.” I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me. Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way: 1) If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed. 2) If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page. Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them? <p>Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because:</p> <ol> <li><p>For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here.</p> </li> <li><p>For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc.</p> </li> <li><p>My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books!</p> </li> <li><p>Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently?</p> </li> <li><p>My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample!</p> </li> </ol> <p>And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality.</p> <p>And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.”</p> <p>I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me.</p> <p>Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way:</p> <ol> <li><p>If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed.</p> </li> <li><p>If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page.</p> </li> </ol> <p>Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them?</p> Mon, 02 Oct 2023 12:35:44 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139042 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139042 Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because: 1) For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here. 2) For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc. 3) My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books! 4) Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently? 5) My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample! And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality. And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.” I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me. Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way: 1) If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed. 2) If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page. Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them? <p>Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because:</p> <ol> <li><p>For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here.</p> </li> <li><p>For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc.</p> </li> <li><p>My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books!</p> </li> <li><p>Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently?</p> </li> <li><p>My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample!</p> </li> </ol> <p>And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality.</p> <p>And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.”</p> <p>I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me.</p> <p>Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way:</p> <ol> <li><p>If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed.</p> </li> <li><p>If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page.</p> </li> </ol> <p>Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them?</p> Mon, 02 Oct 2023 12:35:42 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139040 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139040 Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because: 1) For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here. 2) For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc. 3) My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books! 4) Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently? 5) My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample! And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality. And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.” I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me. Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way: 1) If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed. 2) If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page. Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them? <p>Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because:</p> <ol> <li><p>For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here.</p> </li> <li><p>For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc.</p> </li> <li><p>My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books!</p> </li> <li><p>Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently?</p> </li> <li><p>My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample!</p> </li> </ol> <p>And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality.</p> <p>And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.”</p> <p>I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me.</p> <p>Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way:</p> <ol> <li><p>If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed.</p> </li> <li><p>If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page.</p> </li> </ol> <p>Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them?</p> Mon, 02 Oct 2023 12:35:09 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139038 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139038 Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because: 1) For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here. 2) For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc. 3) My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books! 4) Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently? 5) My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample! And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality. And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.” I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me. Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way: 1) If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed. 2) If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page. Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them? <p>Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because:</p> <ol> <li><p>For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here.</p> </li> <li><p>For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc.</p> </li> <li><p>My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books!</p> </li> <li><p>Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently?</p> </li> <li><p>My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample!</p> </li> </ol> <p>And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality.</p> <p>And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.”</p> <p>I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me.</p> <p>Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way:</p> <ol> <li><p>If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed.</p> </li> <li><p>If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page.</p> </li> </ol> <p>Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them?</p> Mon, 02 Oct 2023 12:34:10 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139036 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=139036 Free sample edits 😀 Many editors offer free sample edits. And some clients – especially in the fiction self-publishing space – expect them.I don’t offer them because: 1) For developmental/content editing, samples don’t really work because you need the whole manuscript to make informed decisions about the problems that most need fixing. I have many blog posts and a portfolio that showcase my expertise here. 2) For line/copyediting, a one-thousand-word sample takes a hefty chunk out of my working day. You need to come up with a style sheet, familiarise yourself with the author’s style, etc. 3) My brain doesn’t like working on very small, bitty projects. That’s why I edit books! 4) Carpenters, builders, and workers in other craft professions don’t offer services for free – why should language professionals work differently? 5) My experience is that authors who ask for a free sample are often not my ideal client base. More so if they assume the right to a free sample! And perhaps most importantly: Who’s the one with the editorial expertise here? Authors can get a feel for how I edit (and how much I intervene) from a sample edit, but they’re usually not able to make a professional call on which edit is better quality. And while they can get a feel for customer service, free sample edits offer a “perverse incentive.” I’m not against free samples per se – they are especially useful for new editors and I know very experienced, busy editors who offer them and find them useful for estimating how long a project will take. They’re just not for me. Authors, I also totally understand the desire for a sample edit. Editing is totally unregulated and there be sharks! But I do things this way: 1) If an author asks for a sample edit, if I really want the project, I’ll do one for a fee after the schedule and budget has been confirmed. 2) If an author doesn’t ask for one, then I’ll share a sample of my work with them shortly after starting the project to check we’re on the same page. Editors: do you offer free sample edits? Authors: do you ask for them?