Editorial Notes = clarifying information, additional insight, annotations

Hiya Reader,

Have you ever wondered why water bottles are always 16.9 ounces? Well, I sure did. I reached out to Caitlin Olson who publishes the quirky and always fascinating Today You Should Know which you should subscribe to if you don't already. Here is her response:

"A 16.9-ounce bottle comes out to 500 ml, which confirms the metric system’s influence. My guess is this size stuck in the U.S. thanks to the half-hearted push to “go metric” in the 1970s, which is when companies began selling 2-liter bottles of soda, even though the broader conversion never fully took hold. By coincidence, that same decade was when plastic water bottles were starting to catch on, so I'd wager water bottle brands were likely just getting ahead of the curve with a size that matched both systems."

So now you know, too!
​

Think a friend would appreciate Editorial Notes?

Send them this link to sign up:

(And if you’re the appreciative friend, you can subscribe at the same link.)

Example of the Week

Sometimes this is a good example—or a great one. Sometimes this is a bad example—or just a funny blooper. Sometimes a combination. You never know.

One of my favorite examples of scene and tone setting comes from Harper Lee's classic:

"People moved slowly then. They ambled across the square, shuffled in and out of the stores around it, took their time about everything. A day was twenty-four hours long but seemed longer. There was no hurry, for there was nowhere to go, nothing to buy and no money to buy it with, nothing to see outside the boundaries of Maycomb County."

Awesome verbs! No modifiers!

Incidentally, a new book of Lee's essays and previously unpublished stories just came out, titled The Land of Sweet Forever. Can't wait to add it to my tower of TBRs. 📚

Actionable Tip of the Week

A trick to add to your self-editing toolbox right now!

Longtime subscribers to Editorial Notes know I'm big on giving the advice to get distance on our work to be an effective self-editor. So why do we all — myself most definitely included — find this process so difficult? Why do we need constant reminders of what we already know? And exactly how are we supposed to get distance without the benefit of time?

I recently had a conversation with an excellent editor about an approach I was taking with a particular piece. Guess what I learned? Nothing I didn't already know! Nothing I don't urge (beg, plead, jump on pianos for attention) my clients and writer friends to do! Surprise — she was exactly right. Her comments were precisely what the piece needed. I know and preach these techniques backwards, sideways, better than the back of my hand...so why hadn't I applied them in my own work? "There's a reason," my astute editor commented, "why the saying 'the cobbler's children have no shoes' exists."

Ah. 💡

In that spirit, let me gently remind you of what you already know to do: manufacture that distance in any way possible.

Here's one way. It is most effective if you are already unhappy with the section or know that something's just not right but I can't put my finger on it," but it will work for most any piece.

• Pretend you are editing someone else's work. Give them a name, or even a full backstory if it helps (but don't do this if you are prone to shiny object syndrome!) I'll call them OP for "other person."
• Look at each paragraph in isolation. Literally remove them from your document and paste them into a blank page. If you write really long paragraphs, you can break them up for this exercise if that's easier to manage.
• Read OP's paragraph. What is its function? Is it achieving that? Is it compelling? Clear? Tight? Interesting? Do I want to keep reading? Can I cut or replace anything (words, phrases, punctuation, entire sentences) and still keep OP's intended meaning? Can I cut or replace anything to make OP's intended meaning sound better/be more specific? Don't edit yet; just mark the paragraph as KEEP, EDIT, or CUT.
• Take each subsequent paragraph and look at them in turn, by themselves on an otherwise blank page, asking the same questions and marking them with one of the three choices.
• Put the paragraphs back together. For every paragraph marked CUT, use the strikethrough feature in your software. This preserves the words for now (helpful for those of us who delete too quickly or want previous versions for reference) but takes them out of the reading. For every paragraph marked EDIT, go forth young Padawan. Edit with abandon, focusing closely on all the ways in which OP's paragraph hasn't earned its KEEP. Feel free to use the strikethrough feature here as well!
• Copy the passage onto a new blank page, and delete everything you've struck through. Read it again.

Better now, huh?

This sounds like a lot of work, and in a sense, it is. But how much work are you saving by not spinning your wheels?

Reader Question of the Week

Brian wrote: One question I have about creating a query letter is: how can I effectively show the agent my book’s unique selling point in such a brief and competitive format?

Brian! Great question! The key is to think of your unique selling point as a combination of familiar elements rather than trying to describe something completely original.

The oft-quoted "X meets Y" formula exists because it works. "Eurydice meets The Hunger Games" or "The Sopranos, but in space" immediately tells an agent where your book fits in the market while hinting at what's fresh. But use comparisons strategically. They should be:

• Recent enough that agents know them (last 3 years ideally)
• Actually reflective of your book's tone and content
• Not so obvious they've seen it a hundred times just this morning

Lead with your hook in the first sentence. Don't bury your unique angle. Your opening line should make the agent lean forward. Compare:

• "My book is about a girl who discovers she has magical powers."
• "When a teen hacker accidentally uploads her consciousness into her school's AI system, she has 48 hours to get back to her body before it's declared brain-dead."

The second version immediately shows the concept, the stakes, the ticking clock, and the fresh twist on familiar territory.

Think of the logline in movies…that’s a useful structure that also applies here.

Want to Submit a Reader Question to Helene?

Give in to the urge.

Link of the Week

Something to dream about that needs no introduction: Where writers write: 12 Booker Prize 2025 nominees share their writing spots​

I ❤️ Hearing from You!

Comments? Just reply to this email or click this link. I respond to every email—that's a promise.

Thanks for reading!

~Helene, your writing sherpa