Anne here, and as I've recently sent in the final revisions on my latest book, I thought I'd talk about the editing process. I'm mainly talking about "traditional publishing" which means I'm with one of the "big" publishers, in my case, Berkley, which is part of Penguin, NY. But I'll also mention "indie" publishing, where authors are doing it for themselves.
There are three levels of editing — the structural edit, copyediting, and proof-reading. These days it's all done electronically, and each part is done by a different person. Today I'm talking about the editor who does the structural edit.
The structural edit 
People often expect an editor to be a bit like some school-teachers used to be, happily slashing away with a red (or blue) pen, changing sentences, and in some cases, rewriting whole chunks. In the days we had printed manuscripts and got them posted back with editorial comments written on them. I used to take them to library talks, and people were always surprised how few comments and corrections there were.
There are still editors who do that kind of editing, I believe, but I've never had one, and I've had nine editors so far in my writing career. (That's not because I've driven them bonkers, by the way — in publishing editors tend to move around a bit, both within the company and moving to different publishers. And having babies. And I have moved publishers, too.)
Most editors these days don't correct typos, or make small or large changes to sentences or chapters. Theirs is more a "big picture" edit. They read for story concept, character development, plot, theme, structure, and so on. They spot strengths, flaws and weaknesses in the manuscript and make suggestions to make it a better book. They can see a manuscript much more clearly than the writer, who is usually too close to it — it's hard, when you've just finished writing a book to distinguish the wood from the trees. A really good structural editor will help a writer lift a story from competent to good, from good to outstanding.
The kind of editing I get is generally a letter, giving the editor's overall response, and explaining the areas they think need to be worked on — perhaps a "sagging middle" or something they think will confuse readers. As well, she will return the manuscript I sent with comments in "track changes" so I can see the parts she's talking about. She might correct a typo or something along the way as she spots it, but that's not her main focus.
I've had an editor point out a scene that she thought was a bit too conveniently coincidental — I changed it completely and the book was much stronger for it. In another book, she asked for the romance to start developing earlier. In another there was an awkward transition that needed to be smoothed. I've also had a few suggestions concerning historical events that were true, but which might upset modern readers.
But all of these are suggestions and requests—not instructions—and it's up to me whether or not—and how—I follow them. It's been my experience that when an editor flags a problem in a book they are almost always right. Their suggestions for fixing it, however, are not always right—they are editors not writers. So I always listen to my editor, but don't always fix things the way she suggests.
So I revise the manuscript and send it back, and she will generally approve it. Some editors will ask for several lots of revisions—thankfully I've never had that. I have had books accepted without any revisions, but that makes me a little uncomfortable, because it's my belief that a book can always be improved. Once the manuscript is approved, the editor will pass it on to a copyeditor. I'll talk about that next time.
Indie (independent self-publishing) authors often hire a freelance editor to do all of the above. Not all indie authors do, of course — that's the point of going indie — the author decides.
But that's not all. . .
Editing a manuscript is by no means all that the editor in a traditional house does. They also act as the author's main source of encouragement, and her representative in house. They're the first — and generally the only—point of contact for the author and her agent.
They are the communication conduit between the author and the other publishing departments—contracts (who prepare and oversee authors' contracts), the art department (who design the covers and any marketing displays), the other editing departments (copyediting and proofing), the foreign rights department (who sell our books to overseas publishers), the marketing and publicity departments, legal and accounting, production (who physically produce the books) and more. My editor also prepares the back cover blurb—in my case in cooperation with my agent and me. In other words she oversees the whole process—and if you think that looks like juggling a dozen balls at once, you're probably right.
And if the author is in town, she will probably take her out for a meal.
So, that's what an editor in a traditional house does. Did any of that surprise you? Do you have any questions? Fire away.
This was interesting and informative. I always thought of the editor as someone with a strong pair of glasses and a big red pencil. But the three step process makes a lot of sense.
I’ve read a few books that could have used a stronger structural editor. I notice it most when stories go on too long. Sometimes too much inner dialogue – reliving events over and over again in their minds. Another is descriptions of sex that go on and on. I really don’t think of myself as a prude, but if it should not take 6 pages to describe a sex scene – unless you are writing a “how to” manual (smile).
I think your editors do a pretty good job because I don’t find those problems in your work.
This was interesting and informative. I always thought of the editor as someone with a strong pair of glasses and a big red pencil. But the three step process makes a lot of sense.
I’ve read a few books that could have used a stronger structural editor. I notice it most when stories go on too long. Sometimes too much inner dialogue – reliving events over and over again in their minds. Another is descriptions of sex that go on and on. I really don’t think of myself as a prude, but if it should not take 6 pages to describe a sex scene – unless you are writing a “how to” manual (smile).
I think your editors do a pretty good job because I don’t find those problems in your work.
This was interesting and informative. I always thought of the editor as someone with a strong pair of glasses and a big red pencil. But the three step process makes a lot of sense.
I’ve read a few books that could have used a stronger structural editor. I notice it most when stories go on too long. Sometimes too much inner dialogue – reliving events over and over again in their minds. Another is descriptions of sex that go on and on. I really don’t think of myself as a prude, but if it should not take 6 pages to describe a sex scene – unless you are writing a “how to” manual (smile).
I think your editors do a pretty good job because I don’t find those problems in your work.
This was interesting and informative. I always thought of the editor as someone with a strong pair of glasses and a big red pencil. But the three step process makes a lot of sense.
I’ve read a few books that could have used a stronger structural editor. I notice it most when stories go on too long. Sometimes too much inner dialogue – reliving events over and over again in their minds. Another is descriptions of sex that go on and on. I really don’t think of myself as a prude, but if it should not take 6 pages to describe a sex scene – unless you are writing a “how to” manual (smile).
I think your editors do a pretty good job because I don’t find those problems in your work.
This was interesting and informative. I always thought of the editor as someone with a strong pair of glasses and a big red pencil. But the three step process makes a lot of sense.
I’ve read a few books that could have used a stronger structural editor. I notice it most when stories go on too long. Sometimes too much inner dialogue – reliving events over and over again in their minds. Another is descriptions of sex that go on and on. I really don’t think of myself as a prude, but if it should not take 6 pages to describe a sex scene – unless you are writing a “how to” manual (smile).
I think your editors do a pretty good job because I don’t find those problems in your work.
Thank you for your educational post, Anne. As far as editing goes, my strength is in spotting spelling errors and the like (moreso in the writing of others than in my own). I would make a poor structural editor; I can tell you that a book doesn’t work for me, but I’d find it difficult to analyze a work and give constructive criticism.
Thank you for your educational post, Anne. As far as editing goes, my strength is in spotting spelling errors and the like (moreso in the writing of others than in my own). I would make a poor structural editor; I can tell you that a book doesn’t work for me, but I’d find it difficult to analyze a work and give constructive criticism.
Thank you for your educational post, Anne. As far as editing goes, my strength is in spotting spelling errors and the like (moreso in the writing of others than in my own). I would make a poor structural editor; I can tell you that a book doesn’t work for me, but I’d find it difficult to analyze a work and give constructive criticism.
Thank you for your educational post, Anne. As far as editing goes, my strength is in spotting spelling errors and the like (moreso in the writing of others than in my own). I would make a poor structural editor; I can tell you that a book doesn’t work for me, but I’d find it difficult to analyze a work and give constructive criticism.
Thank you for your educational post, Anne. As far as editing goes, my strength is in spotting spelling errors and the like (moreso in the writing of others than in my own). I would make a poor structural editor; I can tell you that a book doesn’t work for me, but I’d find it difficult to analyze a work and give constructive criticism.
Now that audio books are rising in popularity I wonder if the structural edit should consider how the book will come across to listeners. For example, I think complicated plots with many key characters, each with separate accents, can cause problems for both listeners and narrators. I like it when the hero and heroine of a romance are kept close to the action either through direct involvement or through closely related interests, as this helps keep the focus. I think of the HEA as analogous to a magnetic pole and the magnetic lines of force are like plot threads which should all link to the HEA to maximise enjoyment. Having multiple magnetic poles can cause confusion in my mind and memory and is best avoided in audio I think.
Having said that, Anne, I think that your stories come across really well as audio and just need good narrators (which they have) to do them justice.
Very interesting discussion!
Now that audio books are rising in popularity I wonder if the structural edit should consider how the book will come across to listeners. For example, I think complicated plots with many key characters, each with separate accents, can cause problems for both listeners and narrators. I like it when the hero and heroine of a romance are kept close to the action either through direct involvement or through closely related interests, as this helps keep the focus. I think of the HEA as analogous to a magnetic pole and the magnetic lines of force are like plot threads which should all link to the HEA to maximise enjoyment. Having multiple magnetic poles can cause confusion in my mind and memory and is best avoided in audio I think.
Having said that, Anne, I think that your stories come across really well as audio and just need good narrators (which they have) to do them justice.
Very interesting discussion!
Now that audio books are rising in popularity I wonder if the structural edit should consider how the book will come across to listeners. For example, I think complicated plots with many key characters, each with separate accents, can cause problems for both listeners and narrators. I like it when the hero and heroine of a romance are kept close to the action either through direct involvement or through closely related interests, as this helps keep the focus. I think of the HEA as analogous to a magnetic pole and the magnetic lines of force are like plot threads which should all link to the HEA to maximise enjoyment. Having multiple magnetic poles can cause confusion in my mind and memory and is best avoided in audio I think.
Having said that, Anne, I think that your stories come across really well as audio and just need good narrators (which they have) to do them justice.
Very interesting discussion!
Now that audio books are rising in popularity I wonder if the structural edit should consider how the book will come across to listeners. For example, I think complicated plots with many key characters, each with separate accents, can cause problems for both listeners and narrators. I like it when the hero and heroine of a romance are kept close to the action either through direct involvement or through closely related interests, as this helps keep the focus. I think of the HEA as analogous to a magnetic pole and the magnetic lines of force are like plot threads which should all link to the HEA to maximise enjoyment. Having multiple magnetic poles can cause confusion in my mind and memory and is best avoided in audio I think.
Having said that, Anne, I think that your stories come across really well as audio and just need good narrators (which they have) to do them justice.
Very interesting discussion!
Now that audio books are rising in popularity I wonder if the structural edit should consider how the book will come across to listeners. For example, I think complicated plots with many key characters, each with separate accents, can cause problems for both listeners and narrators. I like it when the hero and heroine of a romance are kept close to the action either through direct involvement or through closely related interests, as this helps keep the focus. I think of the HEA as analogous to a magnetic pole and the magnetic lines of force are like plot threads which should all link to the HEA to maximise enjoyment. Having multiple magnetic poles can cause confusion in my mind and memory and is best avoided in audio I think.
Having said that, Anne, I think that your stories come across really well as audio and just need good narrators (which they have) to do them justice.
Very interesting discussion!
Thank you, Mary. I think in the past editors probably did have a more hands-on approach, but these days they are so busy they don’t have time to, even if they were so inclined.
As for those long sex scenes, some authors are known for 15 page ones, and that’s what their readers love them for, so I guess it’s horses for courses. *g*
Thank you, Mary. I think in the past editors probably did have a more hands-on approach, but these days they are so busy they don’t have time to, even if they were so inclined.
As for those long sex scenes, some authors are known for 15 page ones, and that’s what their readers love them for, so I guess it’s horses for courses. *g*
Thank you, Mary. I think in the past editors probably did have a more hands-on approach, but these days they are so busy they don’t have time to, even if they were so inclined.
As for those long sex scenes, some authors are known for 15 page ones, and that’s what their readers love them for, so I guess it’s horses for courses. *g*
Thank you, Mary. I think in the past editors probably did have a more hands-on approach, but these days they are so busy they don’t have time to, even if they were so inclined.
As for those long sex scenes, some authors are known for 15 page ones, and that’s what their readers love them for, so I guess it’s horses for courses. *g*
Thank you, Mary. I think in the past editors probably did have a more hands-on approach, but these days they are so busy they don’t have time to, even if they were so inclined.
As for those long sex scenes, some authors are known for 15 page ones, and that’s what their readers love them for, so I guess it’s horses for courses. *g*
Kareni, you would probably make a good copyeditor — I’ll talk about those next time. And you’re right, it’s easier to spot errors in other people’s work and harder in your own — which is why we need editors. I know when I’m rereading my own work, I sometimes read what I think I’ve written rather than what I’ve actually typed, partly because, like you, I’m a fast reader so I tend to skim a bit.
Kareni, you would probably make a good copyeditor — I’ll talk about those next time. And you’re right, it’s easier to spot errors in other people’s work and harder in your own — which is why we need editors. I know when I’m rereading my own work, I sometimes read what I think I’ve written rather than what I’ve actually typed, partly because, like you, I’m a fast reader so I tend to skim a bit.
Kareni, you would probably make a good copyeditor — I’ll talk about those next time. And you’re right, it’s easier to spot errors in other people’s work and harder in your own — which is why we need editors. I know when I’m rereading my own work, I sometimes read what I think I’ve written rather than what I’ve actually typed, partly because, like you, I’m a fast reader so I tend to skim a bit.
Kareni, you would probably make a good copyeditor — I’ll talk about those next time. And you’re right, it’s easier to spot errors in other people’s work and harder in your own — which is why we need editors. I know when I’m rereading my own work, I sometimes read what I think I’ve written rather than what I’ve actually typed, partly because, like you, I’m a fast reader so I tend to skim a bit.
Kareni, you would probably make a good copyeditor — I’ll talk about those next time. And you’re right, it’s easier to spot errors in other people’s work and harder in your own — which is why we need editors. I know when I’m rereading my own work, I sometimes read what I think I’ve written rather than what I’ve actually typed, partly because, like you, I’m a fast reader so I tend to skim a bit.
Thanks, Quantum — I like your magnetic analogy for keeping the focus on your main characters and the romance. And I can appreciate the difficulty of keeping numerous characters sounding different in audio. And yes, unlike with a physical book, you can’t flip pages back to check who said what or to clarify some point of confusion in audio.
It’s regarded as a bit old fashioned these days to use “Joan said,” or some other attribution with dialogue. The theory is that you should be able to tell who said what without that, so you’ll see some books with pages of dialogue and very little attribution. But I deliberately include the “Joan saids” etc. keeping audio books in mind, because I heard a recording once when the poor narrator was tying himself in knots trying to differentiate the various different people who were speaking, when all it needed was an occasional “Joan said,” or something.
I’d like to think more about writing with audio in mind. Audio used to be fairly rare, but these days it’s booming, and I haven’t seen much discussion on the web about writing for audio. It’s an area well worth considering. Thanks.
Thanks, Quantum — I like your magnetic analogy for keeping the focus on your main characters and the romance. And I can appreciate the difficulty of keeping numerous characters sounding different in audio. And yes, unlike with a physical book, you can’t flip pages back to check who said what or to clarify some point of confusion in audio.
It’s regarded as a bit old fashioned these days to use “Joan said,” or some other attribution with dialogue. The theory is that you should be able to tell who said what without that, so you’ll see some books with pages of dialogue and very little attribution. But I deliberately include the “Joan saids” etc. keeping audio books in mind, because I heard a recording once when the poor narrator was tying himself in knots trying to differentiate the various different people who were speaking, when all it needed was an occasional “Joan said,” or something.
I’d like to think more about writing with audio in mind. Audio used to be fairly rare, but these days it’s booming, and I haven’t seen much discussion on the web about writing for audio. It’s an area well worth considering. Thanks.
Thanks, Quantum — I like your magnetic analogy for keeping the focus on your main characters and the romance. And I can appreciate the difficulty of keeping numerous characters sounding different in audio. And yes, unlike with a physical book, you can’t flip pages back to check who said what or to clarify some point of confusion in audio.
It’s regarded as a bit old fashioned these days to use “Joan said,” or some other attribution with dialogue. The theory is that you should be able to tell who said what without that, so you’ll see some books with pages of dialogue and very little attribution. But I deliberately include the “Joan saids” etc. keeping audio books in mind, because I heard a recording once when the poor narrator was tying himself in knots trying to differentiate the various different people who were speaking, when all it needed was an occasional “Joan said,” or something.
I’d like to think more about writing with audio in mind. Audio used to be fairly rare, but these days it’s booming, and I haven’t seen much discussion on the web about writing for audio. It’s an area well worth considering. Thanks.
Thanks, Quantum — I like your magnetic analogy for keeping the focus on your main characters and the romance. And I can appreciate the difficulty of keeping numerous characters sounding different in audio. And yes, unlike with a physical book, you can’t flip pages back to check who said what or to clarify some point of confusion in audio.
It’s regarded as a bit old fashioned these days to use “Joan said,” or some other attribution with dialogue. The theory is that you should be able to tell who said what without that, so you’ll see some books with pages of dialogue and very little attribution. But I deliberately include the “Joan saids” etc. keeping audio books in mind, because I heard a recording once when the poor narrator was tying himself in knots trying to differentiate the various different people who were speaking, when all it needed was an occasional “Joan said,” or something.
I’d like to think more about writing with audio in mind. Audio used to be fairly rare, but these days it’s booming, and I haven’t seen much discussion on the web about writing for audio. It’s an area well worth considering. Thanks.
Thanks, Quantum — I like your magnetic analogy for keeping the focus on your main characters and the romance. And I can appreciate the difficulty of keeping numerous characters sounding different in audio. And yes, unlike with a physical book, you can’t flip pages back to check who said what or to clarify some point of confusion in audio.
It’s regarded as a bit old fashioned these days to use “Joan said,” or some other attribution with dialogue. The theory is that you should be able to tell who said what without that, so you’ll see some books with pages of dialogue and very little attribution. But I deliberately include the “Joan saids” etc. keeping audio books in mind, because I heard a recording once when the poor narrator was tying himself in knots trying to differentiate the various different people who were speaking, when all it needed was an occasional “Joan said,” or something.
I’d like to think more about writing with audio in mind. Audio used to be fairly rare, but these days it’s booming, and I haven’t seen much discussion on the web about writing for audio. It’s an area well worth considering. Thanks.
I didn’t realize there was a structural editing process, but it makes sense. I am more likely to be a copy editor, having had years of experience correcting attorneys’ briefs when I was working as a paralegal. I would do things like break up run on sentences, change the tense from passive to active, and restructure sentences where the subject, verb and object were too far apart. I notice errors in books all the time, mostly e-books, but occasionally even a print edition.
I still have not gotten into audio books. For one thing, some books have a family tree or a map of where the action takes place at the front, and I find myself flipping back and forth to reference it when I lose track of who is who, or where the action is taking place!
I didn’t realize there was a structural editing process, but it makes sense. I am more likely to be a copy editor, having had years of experience correcting attorneys’ briefs when I was working as a paralegal. I would do things like break up run on sentences, change the tense from passive to active, and restructure sentences where the subject, verb and object were too far apart. I notice errors in books all the time, mostly e-books, but occasionally even a print edition.
I still have not gotten into audio books. For one thing, some books have a family tree or a map of where the action takes place at the front, and I find myself flipping back and forth to reference it when I lose track of who is who, or where the action is taking place!
I didn’t realize there was a structural editing process, but it makes sense. I am more likely to be a copy editor, having had years of experience correcting attorneys’ briefs when I was working as a paralegal. I would do things like break up run on sentences, change the tense from passive to active, and restructure sentences where the subject, verb and object were too far apart. I notice errors in books all the time, mostly e-books, but occasionally even a print edition.
I still have not gotten into audio books. For one thing, some books have a family tree or a map of where the action takes place at the front, and I find myself flipping back and forth to reference it when I lose track of who is who, or where the action is taking place!
I didn’t realize there was a structural editing process, but it makes sense. I am more likely to be a copy editor, having had years of experience correcting attorneys’ briefs when I was working as a paralegal. I would do things like break up run on sentences, change the tense from passive to active, and restructure sentences where the subject, verb and object were too far apart. I notice errors in books all the time, mostly e-books, but occasionally even a print edition.
I still have not gotten into audio books. For one thing, some books have a family tree or a map of where the action takes place at the front, and I find myself flipping back and forth to reference it when I lose track of who is who, or where the action is taking place!
I didn’t realize there was a structural editing process, but it makes sense. I am more likely to be a copy editor, having had years of experience correcting attorneys’ briefs when I was working as a paralegal. I would do things like break up run on sentences, change the tense from passive to active, and restructure sentences where the subject, verb and object were too far apart. I notice errors in books all the time, mostly e-books, but occasionally even a print edition.
I still have not gotten into audio books. For one thing, some books have a family tree or a map of where the action takes place at the front, and I find myself flipping back and forth to reference it when I lose track of who is who, or where the action is taking place!
Thanks for this interesting post. I am a fan of spelling and grammar and I wish that more publishing people would be a little more conscientious about those minor details. I do think it is good that someone is specifically helping writers produce a better book. I am sure writers appreciate that too.
I am not a fan of audio books…not sure why.
Hope everyone is well and safe and happy.
Thanks for this interesting post. I am a fan of spelling and grammar and I wish that more publishing people would be a little more conscientious about those minor details. I do think it is good that someone is specifically helping writers produce a better book. I am sure writers appreciate that too.
I am not a fan of audio books…not sure why.
Hope everyone is well and safe and happy.
Thanks for this interesting post. I am a fan of spelling and grammar and I wish that more publishing people would be a little more conscientious about those minor details. I do think it is good that someone is specifically helping writers produce a better book. I am sure writers appreciate that too.
I am not a fan of audio books…not sure why.
Hope everyone is well and safe and happy.
Thanks for this interesting post. I am a fan of spelling and grammar and I wish that more publishing people would be a little more conscientious about those minor details. I do think it is good that someone is specifically helping writers produce a better book. I am sure writers appreciate that too.
I am not a fan of audio books…not sure why.
Hope everyone is well and safe and happy.
Thanks for this interesting post. I am a fan of spelling and grammar and I wish that more publishing people would be a little more conscientious about those minor details. I do think it is good that someone is specifically helping writers produce a better book. I am sure writers appreciate that too.
I am not a fan of audio books…not sure why.
Hope everyone is well and safe and happy.
I do copy editing for doctoral and undergrad papers, mostly medical stuff, but it does involve just a bit of structural editing; is the paper coherent, does it follow logically to it’s conclusion, etc…? I am thrilled to follow this discussion of different types of editing. Thank you.
I do copy editing for doctoral and undergrad papers, mostly medical stuff, but it does involve just a bit of structural editing; is the paper coherent, does it follow logically to it’s conclusion, etc…? I am thrilled to follow this discussion of different types of editing. Thank you.
I do copy editing for doctoral and undergrad papers, mostly medical stuff, but it does involve just a bit of structural editing; is the paper coherent, does it follow logically to it’s conclusion, etc…? I am thrilled to follow this discussion of different types of editing. Thank you.
I do copy editing for doctoral and undergrad papers, mostly medical stuff, but it does involve just a bit of structural editing; is the paper coherent, does it follow logically to it’s conclusion, etc…? I am thrilled to follow this discussion of different types of editing. Thank you.
I do copy editing for doctoral and undergrad papers, mostly medical stuff, but it does involve just a bit of structural editing; is the paper coherent, does it follow logically to it’s conclusion, etc…? I am thrilled to follow this discussion of different types of editing. Thank you.
Thanks, Karin, yes, sounds like you’d be a good copyeditor, though fiction is a bit different, and run-on sentences are rife. *g* I, too, notice errors all the time, and wince for the authors, because their copyeditor should have picked them up.
Maps and charts on kindle aren’t very legible, I find — the print is too small and the image doesn’t enlarge — at least it doesn’t on my paperwhite, which is getting elderly.
Thanks, Karin, yes, sounds like you’d be a good copyeditor, though fiction is a bit different, and run-on sentences are rife. *g* I, too, notice errors all the time, and wince for the authors, because their copyeditor should have picked them up.
Maps and charts on kindle aren’t very legible, I find — the print is too small and the image doesn’t enlarge — at least it doesn’t on my paperwhite, which is getting elderly.
Thanks, Karin, yes, sounds like you’d be a good copyeditor, though fiction is a bit different, and run-on sentences are rife. *g* I, too, notice errors all the time, and wince for the authors, because their copyeditor should have picked them up.
Maps and charts on kindle aren’t very legible, I find — the print is too small and the image doesn’t enlarge — at least it doesn’t on my paperwhite, which is getting elderly.
Thanks, Karin, yes, sounds like you’d be a good copyeditor, though fiction is a bit different, and run-on sentences are rife. *g* I, too, notice errors all the time, and wince for the authors, because their copyeditor should have picked them up.
Maps and charts on kindle aren’t very legible, I find — the print is too small and the image doesn’t enlarge — at least it doesn’t on my paperwhite, which is getting elderly.
Thanks, Karin, yes, sounds like you’d be a good copyeditor, though fiction is a bit different, and run-on sentences are rife. *g* I, too, notice errors all the time, and wince for the authors, because their copyeditor should have picked them up.
Maps and charts on kindle aren’t very legible, I find — the print is too small and the image doesn’t enlarge — at least it doesn’t on my paperwhite, which is getting elderly.
Thanks, Annette, the spelling thing can be tricky. I know a lot of Australian authors who get complaints from American readers because of all their spelling “mistakes” — which are actually the correct English (and Australian) original spelling. And some grammar differs between countries, too. But some is universal, no matter which side of the pond it comes from, and I still see traditionally published authors’ books with annoying and unnecessary grammar mistakes. One I notice all the time is ‘I’ when it should be ‘me’. As in, John treated Julie and I to lunch. !!! A couple of my favorite authors do that all the time and I mentally curse the copyeditors who should have corrected it.
Thanks, Annette, the spelling thing can be tricky. I know a lot of Australian authors who get complaints from American readers because of all their spelling “mistakes” — which are actually the correct English (and Australian) original spelling. And some grammar differs between countries, too. But some is universal, no matter which side of the pond it comes from, and I still see traditionally published authors’ books with annoying and unnecessary grammar mistakes. One I notice all the time is ‘I’ when it should be ‘me’. As in, John treated Julie and I to lunch. !!! A couple of my favorite authors do that all the time and I mentally curse the copyeditors who should have corrected it.
Thanks, Annette, the spelling thing can be tricky. I know a lot of Australian authors who get complaints from American readers because of all their spelling “mistakes” — which are actually the correct English (and Australian) original spelling. And some grammar differs between countries, too. But some is universal, no matter which side of the pond it comes from, and I still see traditionally published authors’ books with annoying and unnecessary grammar mistakes. One I notice all the time is ‘I’ when it should be ‘me’. As in, John treated Julie and I to lunch. !!! A couple of my favorite authors do that all the time and I mentally curse the copyeditors who should have corrected it.
Thanks, Annette, the spelling thing can be tricky. I know a lot of Australian authors who get complaints from American readers because of all their spelling “mistakes” — which are actually the correct English (and Australian) original spelling. And some grammar differs between countries, too. But some is universal, no matter which side of the pond it comes from, and I still see traditionally published authors’ books with annoying and unnecessary grammar mistakes. One I notice all the time is ‘I’ when it should be ‘me’. As in, John treated Julie and I to lunch. !!! A couple of my favorite authors do that all the time and I mentally curse the copyeditors who should have corrected it.
Thanks, Annette, the spelling thing can be tricky. I know a lot of Australian authors who get complaints from American readers because of all their spelling “mistakes” — which are actually the correct English (and Australian) original spelling. And some grammar differs between countries, too. But some is universal, no matter which side of the pond it comes from, and I still see traditionally published authors’ books with annoying and unnecessary grammar mistakes. One I notice all the time is ‘I’ when it should be ‘me’. As in, John treated Julie and I to lunch. !!! A couple of my favorite authors do that all the time and I mentally curse the copyeditors who should have corrected it.
I’m glad you’re enjoying it. Your work reminds me of the many school essays I used to correct. I think I’m a bit of both — I’m pretty good with copyediting — my editors tell me my manuscripts are always pretty clean (apart from slipping into Australian English (which is the same as UK English) occasionally. And I enjoy talking about books and unfinished manuscripts on a story/structural level with writer friends. It’s less easy to see that kind of thing with my own books, however.
I’m glad you’re enjoying it. Your work reminds me of the many school essays I used to correct. I think I’m a bit of both — I’m pretty good with copyediting — my editors tell me my manuscripts are always pretty clean (apart from slipping into Australian English (which is the same as UK English) occasionally. And I enjoy talking about books and unfinished manuscripts on a story/structural level with writer friends. It’s less easy to see that kind of thing with my own books, however.
I’m glad you’re enjoying it. Your work reminds me of the many school essays I used to correct. I think I’m a bit of both — I’m pretty good with copyediting — my editors tell me my manuscripts are always pretty clean (apart from slipping into Australian English (which is the same as UK English) occasionally. And I enjoy talking about books and unfinished manuscripts on a story/structural level with writer friends. It’s less easy to see that kind of thing with my own books, however.
I’m glad you’re enjoying it. Your work reminds me of the many school essays I used to correct. I think I’m a bit of both — I’m pretty good with copyediting — my editors tell me my manuscripts are always pretty clean (apart from slipping into Australian English (which is the same as UK English) occasionally. And I enjoy talking about books and unfinished manuscripts on a story/structural level with writer friends. It’s less easy to see that kind of thing with my own books, however.
I’m glad you’re enjoying it. Your work reminds me of the many school essays I used to correct. I think I’m a bit of both — I’m pretty good with copyediting — my editors tell me my manuscripts are always pretty clean (apart from slipping into Australian English (which is the same as UK English) occasionally. And I enjoy talking about books and unfinished manuscripts on a story/structural level with writer friends. It’s less easy to see that kind of thing with my own books, however.
This has been a fascinating post. I’m always interested in first hand experience of the publishing process. Its also interesting to see/hear how it has changed over the years.
I’ve never edited professionally but did edit a friends newspaper column for 10 years. Those sagging middles…yep. Those are a thing! It was always interesting how sometimes just rearranging the paragraphs would sometimes fix the problem. Definitely another eye could solve problems. I couldn’t write the solution but I could give suggestions.
Like you, he didn’t always do what I suggested but about 85% of the time he did. And like you, any time I couldn’t find anything TO suggest, it always made me (and him) worry. Because really, there is always something to fix (grin).
This has been a fascinating post. I’m always interested in first hand experience of the publishing process. Its also interesting to see/hear how it has changed over the years.
I’ve never edited professionally but did edit a friends newspaper column for 10 years. Those sagging middles…yep. Those are a thing! It was always interesting how sometimes just rearranging the paragraphs would sometimes fix the problem. Definitely another eye could solve problems. I couldn’t write the solution but I could give suggestions.
Like you, he didn’t always do what I suggested but about 85% of the time he did. And like you, any time I couldn’t find anything TO suggest, it always made me (and him) worry. Because really, there is always something to fix (grin).
This has been a fascinating post. I’m always interested in first hand experience of the publishing process. Its also interesting to see/hear how it has changed over the years.
I’ve never edited professionally but did edit a friends newspaper column for 10 years. Those sagging middles…yep. Those are a thing! It was always interesting how sometimes just rearranging the paragraphs would sometimes fix the problem. Definitely another eye could solve problems. I couldn’t write the solution but I could give suggestions.
Like you, he didn’t always do what I suggested but about 85% of the time he did. And like you, any time I couldn’t find anything TO suggest, it always made me (and him) worry. Because really, there is always something to fix (grin).
This has been a fascinating post. I’m always interested in first hand experience of the publishing process. Its also interesting to see/hear how it has changed over the years.
I’ve never edited professionally but did edit a friends newspaper column for 10 years. Those sagging middles…yep. Those are a thing! It was always interesting how sometimes just rearranging the paragraphs would sometimes fix the problem. Definitely another eye could solve problems. I couldn’t write the solution but I could give suggestions.
Like you, he didn’t always do what I suggested but about 85% of the time he did. And like you, any time I couldn’t find anything TO suggest, it always made me (and him) worry. Because really, there is always something to fix (grin).
This has been a fascinating post. I’m always interested in first hand experience of the publishing process. Its also interesting to see/hear how it has changed over the years.
I’ve never edited professionally but did edit a friends newspaper column for 10 years. Those sagging middles…yep. Those are a thing! It was always interesting how sometimes just rearranging the paragraphs would sometimes fix the problem. Definitely another eye could solve problems. I couldn’t write the solution but I could give suggestions.
Like you, he didn’t always do what I suggested but about 85% of the time he did. And like you, any time I couldn’t find anything TO suggest, it always made me (and him) worry. Because really, there is always something to fix (grin).
Thanks, Vicki — and yes, a manuscript can always be improved, and a good editorial eye is invaluable.
Thanks, Vicki — and yes, a manuscript can always be improved, and a good editorial eye is invaluable.
Thanks, Vicki — and yes, a manuscript can always be improved, and a good editorial eye is invaluable.
Thanks, Vicki — and yes, a manuscript can always be improved, and a good editorial eye is invaluable.
Thanks, Vicki — and yes, a manuscript can always be improved, and a good editorial eye is invaluable.