An Editor Is Not.....

Just want to try and restore the rest of that lost post. You remember, the brilliant one? So I'm going to do it in pieces.

So, without further ado, here is part 1 of "An Editor Is Not...."


An editor is not your friend.

That means you should expect a polite rejection but not an apology if she chooses not to accept your submission. That also means she isn't going to send you flowers when she acquires your submission. (Your real friends, however, should take you out and give you champagne. :)

That means that even if you had a drink together at some conference, she might not remember you or give you a special reading when you submit.

That means she doesn't have to speak at your chapter meeting or judge your chapter's contest, and if she does, you should be fulsome in your gratitude (editors usually are doing that on their own time).

This means you do not need to-- indeed, you should not-- give her/him a gift for Christmas or send her a card on her birthday.

That means also that you should not expect loyalty from an editor. The editor owes you one thing-- an effective edit of any assigned/acquired manuscript. She is not bound to buy your next submission, or remember your birthday, or put up with your bad moods, or forgive your intemperate phone calls.

That also means you shouldn't risk your career out of some loyalty to her. If your editor leaves the publisher, you can of course go with her (if she offers a good contract :), but whatever you do, it should be because it's good for your career. You should not identify so much with her that you jeopardize your own future sales to this house, or argue with her former superior, or condescend to her replacement. It might be true that she was badly treated by this publisher, or maybe not-- and maybe you want to factor that into your career planning. (When several editors are laid off at once, for example, that's often a sign that a line will be cancelled, and that's a good time to pay attention and make a new plan.) But don't burn your bridges-- no matter how fond you were of this editor, it's not your battle. (Also, don't mix metaphors. :)

After your editor leaves is often a rather hazardous time. You should be assigned to a new editor, and if you make it clear that you prefer the old editor, don't be surprised if you are re-assigned yet again, to someone else, and then to no one. This is really a time to lie low, to make deadlines, to be polite and businesslike, and to do some subtle probing to find out what sort of submissions your new editor prefers. NOT a good idea to sniff, "My old sainted editor always loved my stuff!" You might hear, "Precisely why she was asked to leave," and that is something we never want to hear. :)

That also means that your editor is not likely to go the extra mile for you. The moment her loyalty is for you and against her employer, you really ought to start worrying, because she's not doing you any favors that way. SHE is not the one who is going to pay you or get your book into the stores. She shouldn't be pitting you against your own publisher... and if she does, she is not only not your friend, but not a good editor either.

That's not to say she should try to screw you out of what's due you... but she isn't your agent either. Your agent is the one who should argue for a bigger advance or better cover. (Or you should do that, if you don't have an agent.) You should never expect your editor to risk her job to protect you or help you.

So don't mix the personal with the professional. Friends you do business with so often become enemies. Publishing is a small world, and you don't need any enemies. Be friendly with everyone you work with, but friends with none.

Alicia