An American Editor

July 16, 2014

The Business of Editing: I Got Rhythm!

To put us in the proper frame of mind, here are The Happenings, a 1960s rock group, singing George Gershwin’s Depression-era song “I Got Rhythm”:

Life is a river of rhythm. Everything is to some kind of beat. I’ve heard musicians say they are inspired by nature’s rhythms; I know painters certainly are. And so are editors, albeit in perhaps a different manner.

Years ago I edited journal articles as well as books. What I found was that, for me, individual journal articles were a money-losing proposition. The reason was that I no sooner found the “rhythm” of the article than it was finished and I had to go to a new article and master a new rhythm. Books, I found, were different.

I know that you will point out that many books are written by multiple authors or are collections of articles. True. I work on large books, often running thousands of manuscript pages (e.g., I am currently working on a book that has 720 chapters, each written by a different author or group of authors, that when finished will have run more than 20,000 manuscript pages). But that book has an overall rhythm.

I have found that a key to improving my effective hourly rate is the ability to find and work with a book’s rhythm. In the case of the collaborative book, that rhythm may be that of the book editor(s), such as the editor’s preference for certain types of phrasing. It is also found in the style, such as the publisher’s preferences.

Most importantly, every author has a rhythm and most of the books I work on have long chapters (one chapter in a current project, for example, runs nearly 350 manuscript pages; more typically, chapters run 50 to 75 manuscript pages), which gives me an opportunity to join with the author’s rhythm as I edit. The rhythm of a project lets me discover the language choices that the author makes. For example, some authors always use “due to,” almost as if they are afraid to commit to a more specific alternative such as “caused by”; some authors consistently misspell a word (e.g., “casual” when they mean “causal”); some authors consistently fail to define necessary comparative measures (e.g., always write “1 in 100” but never define 100 what); some authors clearly have a gender bias in their writing; some authors regularly mix singular and plural, present and past in the same sentence; and the list goes on.

Every author, like every editor, has identifiable language foibles or traits that we generically call style. In editing, quickly identifying the author’s style or the style of a book, regardless of the number of contributors, is a key to getting into the manuscript’s rhythm. And when an editor can merge into the manuscript’s rhythm, the editing rises to a higher level.

Editing is an art and is no different from any other art. Successful editors have mastered not only the foundation techniques of editing, but have learned to merge into the rhythm. We all know that some editors are better editors than ourselves. As in all art endeavors, there is always someone the artist admires as being better than they. It is because we recognize a higher skill level. From my observations, I think that higher skill level comes about from being faster at finding, understanding, and mastering the rhythm.

Rhythm is important at several levels, not least of which is that finding it enables us to preserve the author’s voice while editing. When I read author complaints about how an editor destroyed the author’s voice, my first thought is that the editor didn’t find the rhythm. We speak in rhythm, we play music in rhythm, we dance in rhythm, we walk in rhythm — we do virtually everything in rhythm. Consequently, we need to be aware of competing rhythms.

When we think of editing in terms of rhythm, we recognize that our rhythm competes with the author’s rhythm. If we let the rhythms compete, we distort the author’s tone and message because our rhythm will dominate. But if we make an effort to discover the author’s rhythm, we can adopt it as our own for the editing process.

Rhythm doesn’t only refer to beat, which is often how we think of rhythm in music. Rhythm refers also to flow. We think of certain books as masterpieces, literary classics. That is because we can identify and flow with the rhythm of the book. The language choices and arrangements make up the rhythm and when an editor can identify that rhythm, the editor can maintain and even improve it; when the editor cannot identify the rhythm, the editor is more likely to destroy it.

All of this is important to an editor because it is a reason why an editor’s education concerning words and language should be ongoing. I know editors who last bought and read a book on language decades ago. Consequently, when they edit today, they apply the thoughts and concepts they learned decades ago; they are unable to compare yesterday with today to determine which better serves their client because there is only yesterday.

I am currently reading The Most Dangerous Book: The Battle for James Joyce’s Ulysses by Kevin Birmingham. What is relevant to our discussion is that Joyce’s brilliance (although I admit I do not particularly like or think highly of Ulysses) was recognized by only a handful of his contemporaries, primarily Ezra Pound and Margaret Anderson. Those who saw Joyce’s brilliance as a writer were themselves trying to move literary thinking from the early 19th century to the 20th century. They were obstructed by those who believed that the golden age of literature was the late 18th–early 19th century and were determined to make Joyce’s writing conform to that “golden age.”

Editors and publishers who saw Joyce’s writing insisted on rewriting and cutting because what he wrote they couldn’t understand (or accept).

Whether one likes where language is going or not does not matter. What does matter is that we editors need to grasp and understand the rhythm of the manuscripts we work on and we need to continually educate ourselves as to where our language is going so that we help the author rather than hinder the author. We need to be able to say, “I got rhythm!”

Richard Adin, An American Editor


  1. This is a nicely expressed concept that I (and, I suspect, many other editors) understand instinctively but have not seen articulated, or been able to articulate ourselves.

    And it explains how sometimes you can spot plagiarism in a manuscript: the rhythm changes. It might be subtle or abrupt, but suddenly you realize the author’s voice is different, so you back up and investigate.

    Rhythm explains a lot about how we as editors can get out of sync with a project. In the same way the publishers used in above example were “determined to make Joyce’s writing conform to that ‘golden age,'” we can get too wrapped up in trying to make a manuscript conform to rules of spelling, punctuation, and grammar. (Guilty as charged; I have a few pet peeves that I can’t leave unaddressed, even when I know I should keep my hands off.)

    The key word here is “conform.” The minute anything has to conform to some standard, problems will pop up, especially when the point of the work is to express individuality. An editor needs to not only understand rhythm and balance, but also understand when conformity breaks are appropriate. It’s a heck of a difficult judgment call!


    Comment by Carolyn — July 16, 2014 @ 5:29 am | Reply

  2. Interesting that you used to do journal articles, but opted not to due to profitability reasons. The editing I enjoy the most involves scientific manuscripts, and I’d do more of them gladly.


    Comment by CommNatural — July 16, 2014 @ 10:09 am | Reply

  3. Today’s article is really food for thought. You’re so right. A book that has rhythm really flows along.

    On another subject entirely, can you refer me to a book (or website) that explains text citations more fully than the APA Publication Manual does. I edit qualitative doctoral dissertations, and I need more info on APA style citations. I would really appreciate it.

    I must say, every time I respond to an “American Editor” article I get very nervous. How many mistakes am I making? Guess that nervousness will never leave me.


    Comment by Mary-Anne Pops — July 16, 2014 @ 2:26 pm | Reply

    • Don’t worry about making mistakes. I had a huge gaffe in the title of today’s article that was kindly pointed out to me, giving me a chance to correct it but not before the article went out to all subscribers. We all make mistakes; it is just that editors try to be more aware of them.

      A handy book to have for citation information is Cite Right, 2nd ed., by Charles Lipson (ISBN: 978-0-226-48464-8). It is inexpensive ($14) but a great summary of various citation styles, including APA, AMA, Chicago, and MLA. It is not explanatory in the sense that “these are the reasons why surname precedes first name in XYZ style”, but in the sense of clearly laying out how a style should be put together. If viewed as a companion to the primary source, it is an excellent tool. If you check it out, let me know if it is what you are looking for.


      Comment by americaneditor — July 16, 2014 @ 4:08 pm | Reply

  4. Fascinating article and right in so many ways, save that often the original author lacks voice, style, rhythm. More often, in my experience, the editor’s challenge is not to unearth those qualities in the original manuscript but to create them essentially from scratch.


    Comment by Judy Margolis — July 17, 2014 @ 4:38 pm | Reply

    • Depends on what kind of editor you are, and the job parameters. An editor creating those qualities “essentially from scratch” is reinventing the author’s voice, so unless that’s part of the agreed-upon tasks of an editing job, then you could be tripping down the path into ethics issues discussed in another post.


      Comment by Carolyn — July 18, 2014 @ 5:59 am | Reply

  5. […] two lovely excerpts from Richard Adin’s post at his An American Editor blog on how an editor must not compete with the author’s style but adopt […]


    Pingback by Editorial Jam Sessions | Marissa VU – Editing — July 18, 2014 @ 7:10 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: