Letters From the House
An editor’s salon on story, craft, and the courage to revise.
I believe editing is a craft — a discipline learned through years of apprenticeship, trial, and curiosity. I came up studying under people who had done the same, and what they passed down wasn’t just technique; it was respect for story, for the author’s intent, and for the invisible labor of learning what you don’t yet know.
Today, that craft feels like a dying art. Too many people rush into “helping writers” without first learning how to sit inside a story. They leap before they understand what they’re changing — and that does a disservice to both the work and the writers who trust them.
This is my answer to that. Letters from the House is where I slow the process down, honor the craft, and share what I’ve learned — and what I’m still learning.
I don’t believe editors exist to fix stories; I believe we’re caretakers of them. We help authors think more deeply, make intentional choices, and find the heartbeat of their own work.
If there’s one truth that runs through everything I teach, it’s this:
You don’t know what you don’t know — until you do.
And that’s the beauty of it.
Letters from the House is the editorial journal of House of Braus—where we slow down, think deeply, and talk honestly about the art and emotional architecture of revision.
A quiet corner of the publishing world for authors who are tired of quick tips and ready for craft with context.
A Quick Note on Intention
I’ve been having a lot of conversations lately—some with clients, some with industry friends, and a few with authors trying to figure out what the next step is. And the same questions keep surfacing:
How do I know who to trust?
What kind of edit do I actually need?
How do I get feedback without getting crushed?
What’s worth investing in—and what isn’t?
How to Know Whether to Take Someone’s Advice
An author and I were talking recently about the state of things—how the publishing world has shifted, and how we both hope the pendulum might eventually swing back. Less contests. More connection. Less performance-based content. More genuine conversation.
She said something that stuck with me: Even if the industry does shift back toward engagement over contests, how are authors supposed to know who to listen to?
It’s a good question.
And while I’m no crystal ball of perfect answers (really, I promise), I have been thinking about this one for a long time.
Let’s Talk About Rubrics, Baby
Confession time: I used to love judging writing contests.
Seriously. There was something strangely satisfying about giving unsolicited advice without the need for follow-up, all wrapped in a shroud of anonymity. Free publicity, a sense of doing good, the illusion of authority? Chef’s kiss.
But these days?
I stay far, far away.
Because once you’ve seen behind the curtain enough times, you start to notice things. Things you can’t unsee. Things that feel increasingly hard to excuse.
Let’s Talk About Line Edits (And Why I Won’t Do Them Without a Dev Edit First)
If you're confused about what kind of edit your book needs, you're not alone.
And lately? A lot of authors have been telling me the same thing: they’re overwhelmed.
More than ever, authors are finding it difficult to search for editors, understand the titles, or even know what kind of support their manuscript needs. The publishing landscape is flooded with offerings—and not all of them are clear (or accurate) about what’s actually being provided.
In fact, nearly every consultation I’ve had lately includes a clarifying conversation about what each stage of editing actually looks like. And I understand.
Sample This — Let’s Talk About Getting Rid of Sample Edits (or Why I don’t do sample edits and what I do instead)
Here’s a hot take: I don’t believe sample edits are the best way to vet a developmental editor.
Let me be clear—I'm not saying you should hire someone without seeing how they work. I am saying the standard industry practice of asking for a few free pages marked up in Track Changes isn’t serving either party the way we think it is. Especially not for developmental editing.
Because here’s the thing: a sample edit on paper is better suited to copy editors. That kind of edit is about surface-level issues—consistency, grammar, punctuation, repetition. You can absolutely get a sense of skill from that kind of sample.
But developmental editing? That’s a whole different beast. And a few pages marked up in isolation won’t give you a real feel for what the work is like. Not for you. Not for me.
How to Find the Right Developmental Editor (and What That Even Means)
You’ve got a draft. A messy, brilliant, half-loved draft. You know it needs help—but from who? Everyone says “get an editor” like that’s a one-size-fits-all answer.
It’s not. Especially when it comes to developmental editing.
So let’s start here: if you’re not quite sure what kind of editor you need, I highly recommend this blog post from Jane Friedman. It breaks down the different types of edits (developmental, line, copyediting, etc.) and helps you figure out what stage you’re in.
This post is for those of you looking for help with the bones of your story. Structure. Plot. Pacing. Characters. Motivation. Theme. You’re not here for surface polish—you’re here because you want to make the book work. You’re looking for a developmental editor.