Every manuscript stands to benefit from a set of outside eyes—a sympathetic, but critical, Outside Reader. The Outside Reader offers both manuscript evaluations to help you figure out what to do next and developmental editing to help you implement those decisions.
Our Approach to Developmental editing
Developmental editing means many different things depending on what’s happening with any given book. It’s generally more intensive than copyediting, but falls short of ghostwriting. Developmental editing might mean cutting a 200,000-word manuscript down to 120,000 words; restructuring a thematic manuscript to a chronological arrangement (or vice versa); writing topic sentences and transition sentences; or intensive line editing. If you prefer to maintain more control over your prose, developmental editing means giving you extensive feedback on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis so that you can implement the changes as you see fit. If you’re a perfectionist, developmental editing might mean telling you when it’s time to press send.
We work for you, and our goal is to give your book intellectual and narrative coherence. We aspire to ventriloquism. Our most satisfied clients claim that we make their prose sound like they always imagined it would. Still, since we’re trying to read your mind, we don’t always get it right. You are always welcome to accept or reject any piece of feedback we give you. Our goal is to solve problems. If our solution to any given problem isn’t the right one, we’ll work together to figure it out.
Developmental editing, in other words, is a collaborative process.
Why We Recommend Manuscript Evaluations
Every manuscript, and every client, is different. That’s why we strongly recommend a manuscript evaluation before beginning developmental editing. An evaluation allows us both to get a better sense of what you, and your manuscript, need.
In the manuscript evaluation phrase, we develop a comprehensive evaluation of the strengths, weaknesses, and potential of your manuscript based on whatever materials you have on hand. These materials vary widely, from a draft proposal and two sample chapters, to five conference papers and an article, to a full draft of a complete manuscript. If you’ve already passed through a portion of the peer review (whether successfully or not), we ask to see those reports as well.
At the end of the process, you’ll end up with a letter assessing the fit between your manuscript’s audience, argument, evidence, and structure. We’ll also provide you with a brief (500 to 1,000-word) sample edit to give you a taste of the experience of being line edited. One key difference from peer review: Any time we identify a problem, we identify potential solutions. We will be critical, but supportive. The goal is to get you excited about what your manuscript could be, whatever its current state.
There is no one right time to get a manuscript assessment, but there is one wrong time: during peer review. No one wants to get an 8-page, single-spaced letter pinpointing their manuscript’s weaknesses at the exact moment that they can’t do anything about it. Better, in that case, to wait so that we can incorporate the readers’ feedback into the evaluation process.
Certain situations—for instance, line editing of a manuscript in the final stages of preparation—call for a more bounded evaluation (a “mini-evaluation”) that limits itself to forecasting the nature of the line edits. Please tell us if you think your manuscript falls into this category—we’ll talk through the pros and cons.
One last thing: Given the changes in the academic job market, we can no longer in good conscience offer manuscript evaluations of unrevised dissertations. We want to avoid contributing to the emerging editorial arms race, and we don’t want to profit from hopes and dreams that may prove chimeral. From an editorial perspective, it’s overkill. During the dissertation revision process, you need to stay focused on what your project could be rather than what it is now. If you’re revising your dissertation and are committed to getting editorial support prior to having a contract, we recommend using a draft of the proposal (it can be rough!) and two sample chapters for the evaluation.
Rates
Standard evaluations (of some set of materials resembling a draft manuscript) are priced according to the length of materials provided for review (including notes and peer reviews). The following pricing structure refers to working directly with Audra; discounts are available when working with our editorial associates:
Less than 80,000 words: $1,400
80,000 to 120,000 words: $1,600
120,000 to 150,000 words: $1,800
Greater than 150,000 words: $2,000
Evaluations for squishier sets of materials, including submission packets and exploratory proposals, are billed on an hourly basis (currently $175/hour), with a minimum charge of 4 hours and a maximum charge of 8 hours (in other words: expect to pay somewhere between $700 and $1,400).
Mini-evaluations are provided for a flat fee of $700, regardless of the manuscript’s length.
All subsequent developmental editing services are provided on an hourly basis (currently $175/hour to work with Audra; discounts available when working with our editorial associates). Developmental editing of a full-length manuscript varies dramatically depending on the nature of the work, but a good rule of thumb is 5 to 8 hours per chapter. Plan on more than that if your chapters are unusually long (>15,000 words, including notes). We offer premium scheduling for an additional fee.
Ready to get started?
Just email Audra. Please be sure to tell us what kind of help you’re looking for, where you are in the process (e.g., do you have a contract?), the approximate length (in words) of your current materials, and your preferred timeline.
Please note that we receive more queries that we can responsibly serve. Depending on your topic, intended audience, and editorial needs, Audra may recommend assigning your work to an editorial associate or may recommend other developmental editors outside of our network.