I was once at an event where I met someone who worked for a newspaper. I asked him, “Are you the editor or do you write a column?” He replied, “No, I’m just the proofreader.” The answer made me laugh because he implied that he didn’t think very highly of his paper in the newspaper; In my opinion, however, the proofreader is one of the most important people in the production of any piece of writing, be it a newspaper, a book, or a marketing piece.

You probably know someone, it could even be you, who delights in finding typos and telling everyone about them. This person isn’t afraid to post a comment on your Facebook page or blog to point out the word you misspelled. Even people who aren’t that rude will often think less of a book or publication when they see that it’s full of typos. Mistakes in a post scream shoddy work. And today, with the influx of self-published books on the market, I’m more careful than ever to read a few paragraphs and look for typos before deciding whether to spend money on a book.

An editor is a vital part of the production of a book. A traditional publisher will assign an editor to a book, but they will also assign a proofreader. Often three or four people will edit/proofread the book before it is published. Self-published authors who do their homework usually realize that they need an editor, but they don’t always realize that they also need a proofreader.

An editor can also do the review, but I would advise any author to remember that not all editors are the same. Editors come with various qualifications and skills. One may be good at content editing to help you improve your plot and characters, but you may not catch a typo like “lightning” when you meant “lightning” or even be a good speller. Another editor might be able to punctuate sentences correctly, but they don’t have the creative mindset to know how to develop a story or make an argument flow. And even the best editor is likely to get so close to the work, like the author, that after the first or second reading of the book, he tends to read by heart, thinking he knows what’s on the page, rather than to do it with his eyes, you would actually see what is on the page.

The editors I know who produce quality work are horrified when typos are found in the books they have edited, and are also willing to admit that they are not perfect, that they may miss a misspelled word or a word that is used incorrectly. wrong in a given context. . And a good editor won’t be territorial, but rather pleased that an author hires a proofreader to double-check the work.

Problems can arise when working with a proofreader, so authors should be upfront with the proofreader about what they want. Many times I have heard publishers complain about proofreaders because the authors write back saying that the proofreader found all kinds of mistakes in the book; the editor then discovers that the proofreader, instead of proofreading, decided to play the editor and rewrite the book, not correcting the typos but changing the sentences according to his own stylistic preferences; the author, in turn, not possessing good editing skills, might not know the difference between rephrasing a grammatically incorrect sentence and a change in style, which may lead the author to believe that the editor was incompetent because the proofreader missed the mark. of the stripe

To resolve this issue, authors should always tell proofreaders that they simply want the proofreader to check for typos or grammatical errors. Nothing stylistic should be changed. In addition, authors must communicate with both the proofreader and the editor. The editor must be able to see the changes or corrections that the proofreader suggests and then approve them or explain why they should not be accepted. The editor needs to get this second pass both to know where they made a mistake and to make sure the proofreader isn’t introducing new errors into the book. I can’t tell you how many times an author who hired a good publisher ends up producing a book with typos because the proofreader was incompetent. Remember, the fact that someone is a teacher or has a degree in English does not necessarily mean that he is a good proofreader, any more than a good mechanic will necessarily be a good person to design a vehicle.

When you hire an editor, let them know up front that you plan to hire a proofreader as well. If you get argumentative about it, you may want to find a different publisher. If you and the editor agree that a proofreader is a good idea, you can ask the editor to recommend a proofreader, perhaps you have worked with a proofreader in the past and you have worked well together. If not, ask for recommendations from other authors you know. While you can go online to find a proofreader, it’s always best to get recommendations. And before you hire a recommended proofreader, look at the book they proofread. If Mary Jane tells you that Henry proofread her book and did a great job, but finds a typo on the first page, think again: if you read another ten pages and don’t find a typo, Henry might be a good fit; no one will catch all typos. Be savvy and do some research before you hire a proofreader.

Finally, just as you would ask your editor to give you a proofreading sample of a few pages to see if you can work with it, you should ask the proofreader to give you a proofreading sample to see what kind of errors or problems they will catch. . If you rewrite your manuscript, think again or keep in mind that you’re finding problems that your editor should have caught. The point is to make sure you know what you’re paying for before you hire someone.

A proofreader can be the last line of defense between an author and the reading public. Don’t try to cut corners by not hiring a proofreader. Good proofreading is essential to producing a quality product that will have readers raving about your book instead of ranting about its typos.