<p>I got some good feedback on the <ahref="/posts/writing/2017/04/01/lessons-from-arcana.html">previous post</a> from writers who appreciated the insight into the editing process. Heck, even I got a lot out of writing the post, because it allowed me to set down in writing a lot of vague thoughts that I had about what worked and what didn’t. That’s one of the big reasons I write as much as I do, a sort of “how can I tell what I think till I see what I say” thing, if we go by E. M. Forster’s words. It’s part of why I’m so keen on non-fiction. I love writing fiction because it shows others new stories, but I love writing non-fiction because I learn as much about myself writing the piece as my readers do about the topic reading it.</p>
<p>Anyway, all that to say, I liked having the chance to write that, and I want to keep writing stuff like that as I work with <em>Arcana</em> as my first anthology.</p>
<p>I’ve edited a lot before. Working with [adjective][species] was fairly straight forward in that I left the call open and edited submissions as I got them. It was simple, but still involved a lot of the editorial motions. My criteria for articles there was that it had a point, expressed it clearly, and was readable. Minor edits were usually okay, and major ones could be requested of the author.</p>
<p>Editing an anthology, however, feels vastly different. It’s not just the competition aspect — though that’s a big part of it — so much as the fact that it’s a singular, rather than ongoing, process. It begins when submissions are received and ends when the final, edited choices are handed off to the publisher to work legal, layout, and printing magic.</p>
<p>Still, I have a good idea of all the steps ahead of me and quite a few guiding hands, which will be quite helpful! Also, as above, I’m hoping that writing this helps me figure things out a little.</p>
