For several years, I’ve had the privilege of working with hundreds of authors – from published novelists and textbook writers to college and high-school students.  And, when you’re a freelance proofreader hanging your shingle on the Web, let’s be honest: you see a very wide quality of writing.  Some of the documents I’ve worked on have required only slight modifications because the author started with a solid grasp of the fundamentals. In most instances, though, writers come to me with text that requires a little more intervention.  And that’s fine with me – after all, that’s why I started this practice. For those projects, I happily stray a little deeper and offer some light copyediting suggestions.

And that’s when a key philosophical issue emerges. How much is too much? When do proofreading and copyediting changes cross the line into full-blown co-authorship?  It’s a delicate question and I don’t think there’s a definitive, consistent answer.  In the early days of MTV, Mick Jagger famously told us that “Too much is never enough,” but most writers – and their editors and proofreaders – would be awfully reluctant to embrace that credo.

In fact, I guess I take the opposite position.  As a proofreader, I start with a little bit o’ Hippocrates: “First, do no harm.” Naturally, in all documents, accuracy and precision must take precedence. Some things are required (proper punctuation, for instance) and some things are forbidden (say, mixed tenses). So certain changes are virtually mandated. But soon, we gradually move into the realm of opinion, style, and taste. Once a proofreader makes a few of these subjective changes on a broader scale, she’s soon dangerously close to substituting her own arbitrary preferences for the unique voice of the writer (and that would be a paying client…) and almost taking partial ownership of the document. In my view, that’s terra non grata for a proofreader.

Ideally, there’s a healthy dialogue between the writer and the proofreader, one where the proofreader is free to draw on her experience and talent to offer expansive suggestions for improving the clarity and readability of the text. But, ultimately, the accept/reject decisions still remain with the author who is accountable for that document. He should only accept changes that he feels match the desired tone and voice of the document. It should always “feel” like it’s the author who’s writing, not the proofreader, who must always remain a trusted – but anonymous – partner in the writing process.