Disagreeing with an editor

Harlequin · Jul 11, 2017

A couple of questions, prompted by my recent experience of paying for a professional editor.

Is it common for editors to recommend rewriting into a different genre? If you are an editor, is this a suggestion you have sometimes made?

what happens when writers and editors disagree over the direction a MS should take? Obviously the author has the final word, but from an authorial perspective, how do you (question for writers) know when to stand you ground, and when to accept experienced wisdom?

I don't in general think I'm particularly egotistical about my MS. I seek out feedback and make continuous changes, including full rewrites in the past. However, what I'm objecting to is not her suggesting changes to my novel (always welcome), but suggesting changes to my basic writing goals/aims (not helpful).

chompers · Jul 11, 2017

For me, it would depend on how experienced they are. But are they really? It all boils down to their credentials and prior experience. So many people nowadays think just because they proofread they can call themselves an editor. And most of the time they even get that wrong (the proofreading). I know someone who advertises herself as an editor, because grammar is what she knows. So she says. And yet I see her posts have errors galore. It's worse than average, in fact.

Old Hack · Jul 11, 2017

Harlequin said:
A couple of questions, prompted by my recent experience of paying for a professional editor.

Is it common for editors to recommend rewriting into a different genre? If you are an editor, is this a suggestion you have sometimes made?

Yes, I've suggested this. But only because it seemed clear to me that the book was already mostly in that genre, and it would be stronger and better if those few changes were made.

what happens when writers and editors disagree over the direction a MS should take?

The writer gets to do what they think is best. Unless, of course, the writer is working to order on the project.

Obviously the author has the final word, but from an authorial perspective, how do you (question for writers) know when to stand you ground, and when to accept experienced wisdom?

Good editors will highlight problems, explain why they're problems, and suggest ways round the problems.

Good authors will then consider the editor's suggestions and if they feel that some of them are wrong they'll still consider the problems the editor has highlighted, and consider how best to fix them--if at all. They might take the editor's suggestions, they might work out a plan of their own, or they might think the problem doesn't exist and therefore do nothing.

Put the book at the centre of all you do. If you really don't think the book will be better for the changes suggested, stand firm. If you're not sure, then talk about it with the editor.

I don't in general think I'm particularly egotistical about my MS. I seek out feedback and make continuous changes, including full rewrites in the past. However, what I'm objecting to is not her suggesting changes to my novel (always welcome), but suggesting changes to my basic writing goals/aims (not helpful).

It does sound as though she's overstepping. It could be that she sees you writing very well but scuppering yourself when it comes to submitting, for example. However, even so, she is still overstepping. You've employed her as an editor, not a career consultant. Tell her to wind her neck in.

chompers said:
For me, it would depend on how experienced they are. But are they really? It all boils down to their credentials and prior experience. So many people nowadays think just because they proofread they can call themselves an editor. And most of the time they even get that wrong (the proofreading). I know someone who advertises herself as an editor, because grammar is what she knows. So she says. And yet I see her posts have errors galore. It's worse than average, in fact.

YES. This.

Harlequin · Jul 11, 2017

Well as a quick example--she's suggested changing the genre from adult fantasy to ya fantasy, changing the title, (edit) add a prologue, cutting the POV from 5 to 1, and removing the philosophy, politics, social issues on the grounds that they too far reaching for ya. I'm not sure there would be anything left.

I've used an indie editor before, and while I got back much critical advice, it was nothing like this. I take the point the ms isn't working for her, but I do kind of feel a lot of her energy is being spent on discussing a hypothetical story, not the ms submitted.

I think there are some good pieces of advice in places, but the extremeness of those suggestions makes me reluctant to implement any of it.

Should have stuck to betas!

Ambrosia · Jul 11, 2017

Harlequin said:
Well as a quick example--she's suggested changing the genre from adult fantasy to ya fantasy,

There is something called New Adult I was just reading about. It might be a way to market it? I don't see your novel as YA. Others may disagree. It could be she is seeing just the age thing of a couple of characters? If you do market it as YA, the next book wouldn't be YA, so I don't know that it would be a good fit for you at all.

But this is a marketing thing, not a change of the manuscript thing so you can put this one on the back burner and not get too excited about it.

Harlequin said:
changing the title,

Did she give you any good suggestions? FWIW, I like your title. That said, I understand from things I've read that titles are one of those things that may be changed when a novel is sold to a publisher. Someone here will know more about it than I do since I haven't been published nor do I have an agent yet. I would count the title the least of the issues you have listed here.

Harlequin said:
(edit) add a prologue, cutting the POV from 5 to 1,

So a total rewrite then? It would change your book beyond recognition. You could, however, go Omni and maintain your story if you decided there was any validity in her advice.

Harlequin said:
and removing the philosophy, politics, social issues on the grounds that they too far reaching for ya. I'm not sure there would be anything left.

So, she wants you to get rid of your world? Without the philosophy, politics, and social issues you would not have a world to base the story in and you would not have a story. It is the story. Your characters are thrown into this world you have created and react to these issues. It is how they handle these things that are the story. No, you wouldn't have anything left because you would have no world left.

Harlequin said:
I've used an indie editor before, and while I got back much critical advice, it was nothing like this. I take the point the ms isn't working for her, but I do kind of feel a lot of her energy is being spent on discussing a hypothetical story, not the ms submitted.

I think there are some good pieces of advice in places, but the extremeness of those suggestions makes me reluctant to implement any of it.

Take what works and leave the rest. Always. It is your story. You are the writer. Only you can make the decision of what works best in it.

You could go the insanity route I am trying out and do a test rewrite on the bits of advice you do find value in. See if you like how the story reads once those suggestions are implemented. Start a separate file, of course, and work on that instead of your original. It may benefit you to see the suggestions in "black and white".

Harlequin said:
Should have stuck to betas!

Is it ok if I agree with you? Plus, it costs less.

Hbooks · Jul 11, 2017

Well as a quick example--she's suggested changing the genre from adult fantasy to ya fantasy,
That would be a pretty big change unless your protagonist is already using a YA voice. Of course, you said you had 5 POV's so maybe one of them is the strongest and in a YA voice. You would know that. I'm not that familiar with your novel. How knowledgeable about the industry is this person? Do they have experience at a publishing house, or are they more of just a proofreader?

changing the title, For me that would depend if their title was better. But then again, I suck at titles.

(edit) add a prologue, cutting the POV from 5 to 1, For both of these, I would question whether it would make the manuscript stronger. Sometimes 5 POV's is a strong story. Other times I find even two to be cluttered and think (even with my favorite writers) that they might have done better just to stick with one narrator. What do the other people who have read your work think?

and removing the philosophy, politics, social issues on the grounds that they too far reaching for ya. I'm not sure there would be anything left. That's just goofy. I read tons of YA and it's chock full of philosophy, politics, and social issues. You need to write in a YA voice, but taking all of that out would surely create one boring book. That one seems like fishy advice, IMHO.

Harlequin · Jul 11, 2017

Yes, the Giver--classic old YA--is all about society and stuff... Lovely book. And many other examples.

I don't want to go too indepth or I'll end up feeling like I'm slagging someone off/making it personal but yes they have industry experience--I *think* Simon and Schuster and some other big houses.

My critique partners and betas (out of the ones who've read all the way) have mostly been baffled by the advice. (For disclosure, Ambrosia above is a previous beta).

The protagonists are twins, so I'd expect a dual pov at the very least. If I took out everythign she suggested, there'd be about 15k of MS left over. Novelette I guess ;-)

I'm open to most suggestions, including title change. But at the risk of sounding stubborn and egotistical, the social/political stuff kind of IS the MS to me. I dunno.

Newcon don't publish any YA as far as I'm aware, and are reading the full after having read a partial. I'll wait and see what they have to say perhaps; I trust their opinion more in this case.

CameronJohnston · Jul 11, 2017

Sounds like what they want it to be is not your novel. Oh, their version *might* appear to them to be more commercial but is that what you really want? You may as well tweak it and write that as an entirely separate novel.

I think most good editors will try and help a novel be the best version of itself it can be, not try and turn it into something else entirely.

lizmonster · Jul 11, 2017

Harlequin said:
I'm open to most suggestions, including title change. But at the risk of sounding stubborn and egotistical, the social/political stuff kind of IS the MS to me. I dunno.

FWIW I'm with you on this. And I think the only obligation you have to an editor that you've hired yourself is the agreed-upon payment and a thank you.

I think you can assume good intentions and believe they were trying to make suggestions that would help you sell the work, but what they've said on a lot of these points sounds subjective in that respect. I don't see non-political YA as a massive seller, but I'm probably also not the best judge there.

Stephen Palmer · Jul 12, 2017

Editors can miss things in MSs, and then it's the author's responsibility to stand up for themselves.
There aren't many editors who genuinely want to work with a doormat.

Stephen Palmer · Jul 12, 2017

Old Hack said:
Good authors will then consider the editor's suggestions and if they feel that some of them are wrong they'll still consider the problems the editor has highlighted, and consider how best to fix them--if at all. They might take the editor's suggestions, they might work out a plan of their own, or they might think the problem doesn't exist and therefore do nothing.

All very true. It's a partnership, after all.

Old Hack · Jul 12, 2017

Stephen Palmer said:
Editors can miss things in MSs, and then it's the author's responsibility to stand up for themselves.
There aren't many editors who genuinely want to work with a doormat.

You present the author-editor relationship as an adversarial one. This is very rarely the case, and it's something most of the editors I've worked with do their best to avoid.

Authors don't have to "stand up for themselves" when editors make suggestions they don't agree with: they just have to discuss with their editors how best to approach the problems highlighted.

And suggesting editors wouldn't want to work with authors who are "doormats" is disrespectful to all concerned. Please be more careful in the future.

Bufty · Jul 12, 2017

Harlequin, you obviously don't have to say, but what did you pay for this edit?

mccardey · Jul 12, 2017

Bufty said:
Harlequin, you obviously don't have to say, but what did you pay for this edit?

More than that, when did the report come back? OP, might you be reacting a bit too quickly, or reading it too defensively? It's often a good idea to let an editorial report settle a bit, before reacting.

Barbara R. · Jul 12, 2017

I'm an editor and a writer, too, so I've seen this issue from both sides. Basically, an editor's job is to help you get your book as close as possible to its ideal self. That means entering into your vision of the story and highlighting ways to realize it more successfully. It doesn't mean telling you you should have written something else to begin with.

That said, there's a lot we don't know about your story. It's reasonable for a savvy editor to give writers practical advice on the publishing industry. If your book is about the adventures of Jinx the space dog but you've written it in language no child would understand, I would certainly point out that to reach your intended audience you need to write in words they'll understand.

You also have to take into account where the advice is coming from, i.e. who your editor is. If you're writing for kids and your editor was a player in the world of children's lit, I'd listen real hard. If your editor is your grade school English teacher who's never written but knows her grammar backwards and forwards...maybe not so much.

In the end, it's your book, and only you can judge whether a particular piece of advice brings you closer or further from your goal. As in any critique, you take what's useful and discard the rest.

Harlequin · Jul 12, 2017

Sent you a note, bufty.

mccardey said:
More than that, when did the report come back? OP, might you be reacting a bit too quickly, or reading it too defensively? It's often a good idea to let an editorial report settle a bit, before reacting.

Yeah, it was only a few days ago, so I've not said anything back yet--the advice is generally to wait a couple weeks. I want to think through how to talk to them first.

I've no objection to criticism, and I've used an indie editor for a past project. I guess my main reaction was confusion, and a lot of red flags stood out to me. For example, they recommended showing more emotion from MC in a particular scene, and commented that we don't know what MC is thinking/feeling.

However, MC is unconscious in that scene. This seems a solid reason to me for not giving her an emotional response. It's possible they were suggesting to rewrite the scene so that character is conscious, and then add in more emotional depth, but if so that's not at all clear.

Barbara R. said:
I'm an editor and a writer, too, so I've seen this issue from both sides. Basically, an editor's job is to help you get your book as close as possible to its ideal self. That means entering into your vision of the story and highlighting ways to realize it more successfully. It doesn't mean telling you you should have written something else to begin with.

That said, there's a lot we don't know about your story. It's reasonable for a savvy editor to give writers practical advice on the publishing industry. If your book is about the adventures of Jinx the space dog but you've written it in language no child would understand, I would certainly point out that to reach your intended audience you need to write in words they'll understand.

You also have to take into account where the advice is coming from, i.e. who your editor is. If you're writing for kids and your editor was a player in the world of children's lit, I'd listen real hard. If your editor is your grade school English teacher who's never written but knows her grammar backwards and forwards...maybe not so much.

In the end, it's your book, and only you can judge whether a particular piece of advice brings you closer or further from your goal. As in any critique, you take what's useful and discard the rest.

Yes... good points. I think that's the heart of my complaint; all the advice is geared towards "here is how to do it as a YA book". There's not any "but if you insist on it being adult... they usually handle X like so". Everything that they've discussed is predicated on a false assumption about the MS's central question, so there is nothing for me to work with. It may well be that what I wanted to do isn't coming through, but I still can't use the advice.

To give a comparison, imagine if you'd written Ender's Game and an editor said "yeah, don't be so concerned with the war allegory, it's a bit far reaching for a novel of this kind. focus on Ender's coming-of-age struggles against bullying and his central quest of trying to fit in. also here's a guide on how to make your book more MG."

(Nota bene, I'm definitely not comparing the quality of my work to Orson Card! But it's a similar-ish set up in what they're asking me to do.)

Fuchsia Groan · Jul 12, 2017

I would go with your gut. If this proposed overhaul doesn't feel like it's still your story, don't do it.

Now, I'm a fan of huge overhauls. I once rewrote an adult SF ms. into a YA ms., switching from third to first person, first on my own and then with agent input. It didn't sell, but I was still happy with it, because it was still my story and raised all the social issues I wanted to raise (which, yes, you can absolutely do in YA! I had books like Feed and Uglies in mind).

When my other book sold, I knew in advance that my editor wanted semi-large changes. But when I read the editorial letter, I could tell she understood my characters, and every suggestion she made would push the book toward being a stronger version of itself, not something totally different.

Not only do you need a good editor, you need an editor who is right for you and your book. You know an editor is right for you when their suggestions fire up your imagination instead of making you feel frustrated.

Yes, give yourself at least a few days to process before making a judgment. The weight of critique can be overwhelming at first. But at some point, you should start feeling as if the editor got inside your head and figured out a few things you couldn't figure out yourself.

If you never feel that way, if very little of the critique resonates, you can still get something out of the experience. I once paid for an author to assess my ms. She seemed kind of perplexed by the book, but she asked one question about it — "Where is the love here?" — that became key to my revision.

You can take good things from a critique without agreeing that the ms. needs a complete genre overhaul. And it's worth noting that even within a genre like YA fantasy, there's quite a range of variation. Some books do have multiple POVs (The Reader has eight, I believe) and explore philosophical and social issues. Books with a single POV and lots of action may indeed be more commercial, but maybe that's not your goal here. I would try to find a comp that does represent your goal, if you don't already have one, and keep it firmly in mind.

ETA: Changing the title does happen aaaalllll the time. I've heard so many stories about it, I'm kind of amazed that my original title made it through the process.

mccardey · Jul 12, 2017

Harlequin said:
Yes... good points. I think that's the heart of my complaint; all the advice is geared towards "here is how to do it as a YA book". There's not any "but if you insist on it being adult... they usually handle X like so". Everything that they've discussed is predicated on a false assumption about the MS's central question, so there is nothing for me to work with. It may well be that what I wanted to do isn't coming through, but I still can't use the advice.

If your editor can't step outside their space and into your space, then s/he won't be able to help, and shouldn't have taken the project on. A lot will depend on how the next conversation goes. If you say 'Yes, but I'm writing this book,' and s/he takes a big step back and says 'Right, then. I'll adapt my thinking' you might still have a workable process. But remember, all is not lost - you still have your book, and you can find someone else if you need to.

Are you self-pubbing? Because if you're not, a good publishing co. will usually provide all the editorial help you need.

Harlequin · Jul 12, 2017

many thanks fuschia and maccardy

I would prefer not to self pub. I'm niche enough as it is without making it even harder to be found and read

I don't have an agent but have two fulls with small genre-specific pubs.

I realise it's quite weird to be in a situation where I'm talking to a paid editor and also submitting, but (long story short) that wasn't intentional.

mccardey · Jul 12, 2017

Harlequin said:
many thanks fuschia and maccardy

I would prefer not to self pub. I'm niche enough as it is without making it even harder to be found and read I don't have an agent but have two fulls with small genre-specific pubs.

I realise it's quite weird to be in a situation where I'm talking to a paid editor and also submitting, but (long story short) that wasn't intentional.

Oh no, it's not weird. I just wondered.

Dawnstorm · Jul 13, 2017

Harlequin said:
The protagonists are twins, so I'd expect a dual pov at the very least. If I took out everythign she suggested, there'd be about 15k of MS left over. Novelette I guess ;-)

Make them telepathic, give them a personality disorder (so they can't even tell themselves apart) and tell everything from their point of view, which is a joint point-of-view and therefore only one. There. I'm good at solving problems, don't you think?

Seriously, though, you can characterise people through what they do and how they're perceived by others, while keeping their inner workings a secret (unless they reveal it themselves). Important characters in a novel don't necessarily need a point of view, not even protagonists. Characters will look differently to readers, depending on the point of view character who observes them. Someone who knows them well? Surprises will have more emotional impact. Someone who doesn't know them at all? The mystery is heightened. A naive point of view who doesn't get what every normal reader can be supposed to understand? You have dramatic irony. Wanting us to understand a character isn't necessarily a reason for their point of view being mandatory.

I say that, though, as someone who loves multiple points of view when reading, and whose whole reason to write (when I still was writing) was to contrast as many points of view as possible and create a social story from that mess. 5 points of view? I laugh at that puny number.

Why am I posting? I don't think cutting points of view is the same as cutting content, so this line surprised me. If this line surprises me, then maybe it would surprise your editor, too? (Although I'd expect an editor to have worked with more people than I have [as a beta], and thus be more experienced with potential miscommunication.) Basically, there's a possibility that you're seeing bigger changes than she might have intended to suggest.

Also, it strikes me that Old Hack talks in terms of problems and fixes, while you talk in terms of changes. Are the changes supposed to fix a problem she pointed out at all, or is this just "to make the book better"? What's the problem with your book being adult fantasy rather than young adult? What's the problem with 5 points of view? The question really isn't what the text you submitted could be; it's what's wrong with the text in the first place. "5 points of view --> 1 point of view" might be fixing the lack of focus for your text, or it might increase the identification with a single character, or, or, or. If you see the problem your editor is seeing you can find your own fixes. If all you have is a suggested change you can take it or leave it, and that's about it.

Harlequin · Jul 13, 2017

Hrm. I wasn't really wanting to get into more detail on this, but I feel I must now. My own fault for starting the thread I guess!

Make them telepathic, give them a personality disorder (so they can't even tell themselves apart) and tell everything from their point of view, which is a joint point-of-view and therefore only one. There. I'm good at solving problems, don't you think?

I realise you're being jokey, but this is already sort of the case. One twin (the girl) suffers from hallucinations and delusions and is an unreliable narrator; the other (the guy) doesn't, but is unreliable in other ways (his self perception as a social "paragon"). The emotional crux of her arc is discovering this and working through it.

The girl character effectively dies at the end, though not straight away, and is revealed not to be the chosen one that she was set up to become. This is also the character the editor is suggesting making the sole pov.
Seriously, though, you can characterise people through what they do and how they're perceived by others, while keeping their inner workings a secret (unless they reveal it themselves). Important characters in a novel don't necessarily need a point of view, not even protagonists. Characters will look differently to readers, depending on the point of view character who observes them. Someone who knows them well? Surprises will have more emotional impact. Someone who doesn't know them at all? The mystery is heightened. A naive point of view who doesn't get what every normal reader can be supposed to understand? You have dramatic irony. Wanting us to understand a character isn't necessarily a reason for their point of view being mandatory.

The reason I want multiple povs is for precisely many of the reasons you list. The story is about perception, or supposed to be; the ways in which we miscommunicate, misunderstand, and misinterpret reality.

As above, the twins have their own points of view because they equally carry the burden of being join protagonists. Their personal arcs are emotional, because they do not actually know the plot which is occurring around them, an d have no way of finding out.

The plot is therefore carried and dealt with by the two adult Calaani who have povs. Here is another issue of misunderstanding; I think the editor didn't realise they are and would continue to be, major characters in subsequent MS. Either way, removing those characters would remove the plot.

The final pov only has three chapters which I don't think is extravagant, mostly occuring early on. She's half human (none of the other POVS are human) and more relateable; she is therefore able to explain to the reader things about the world and setting which I'm not sure could be introduced otherwise. This pov could be eliminated, but I'm not sure much would be gained; it would only be more awkward to introduce her later on, in sequels.

I say that, though, as someone who loves multiple points of view when reading, and whose whole reason to write (when I still was writing) was to contrast as many points of view as possible and create a social story from that mess. 5 points of view? I laugh at that puny number.

Why am I posting? I don't think cutting points of view is the same as cutting content, so this line surprised me. If this line surprises me, then maybe it would surprise your editor, too? (Although I'd expect an editor to have worked with more people than I have [as a beta], and thus be more experienced with potential miscommunication.) Basically, there's a possibility that you're seeing bigger changes than she might have intended to suggest.

Well, this comes back to her assertion that the story's central question is MC's quest for ascension (coming of age). I don't think that's accurate at all; the central question is who are her people/race. She would like me to take out exploration of their society, but exploration of their society is sort of the point.

Also, it strikes me that Old Hack talks in terms of problems and fixes, while you talk in terms of changes. Are the changes supposed to fix a problem she pointed out at all, or is this just "to make the book better"? What's the problem with your book being adult fantasy rather than young adult? What's the problem with 5 points of view? The question really isn't what the text you submitted could be; it's what's wrong with the text in the first place. "5 points of view --> 1 point of view" might be fixing the lack of focus for your text, or it might increase the identification with a single character, or, or, or. If you see the problem your editor is seeing you can find your own fixes. If all you have is a suggested change you can take it or leave it, and that's about it.

I think that's my main complaint. The questions you mention aren't addressed at all. If they'd said, "this cannot be adult fantasy becuase you have X, therefore it is currently stuck as YA" then I'd have something to work with. At the moment they're just "here are things you can do better in your MS", but all the things they suggest doing are in the context/assumption that I'll be rewriting as YA. I think they genuinely don't see any value in aiming for something other than something other than YA.

again, I accept that the MS isn't working for her, and that's *well* worth looking knowing, but my inclination is that it'd benefit from having the YA aspects scaled back, not blown up into a different MS. At the very least we're not on the same page, much less the same book.

Harlequin · Jul 13, 2017

Also adding--one of the reasons I'm reluctant to go into it too much is I haven't spoken to them directly since then, and also they're not here to share their side of it, so inevitably you're only going to get my perspective.

And of course, I think I'm right ;-)

Old Hack · Jul 13, 2017

Harlequin said:
Also adding--one of the reasons I'm reluctant to go into it too much is I haven't spoken to them directly since then, and also they're not here to share their side of it, so inevitably you're only going to get my perspective.

And of course, I think I'm right ;-)

I think you're right not to go further than you have. It's not appropriate to criticise people who aren't here to defend themselves.

I also think you're right. Because from what I can see you've been receptive to the comments given to you by beta readers, and aren't some sort of delicate flower. And because (and this is the biggie) it's your book. You get to say how it goes.

I'd take what you can from the critique and move on. And use a different editor next time.

Harlequin · Jul 13, 2017

Many thanks - and will do.

Disagreeing with an editor

Eat books, not brains!

Such a nasty woman

Eat books, not brains!

Grand Duchess

Eat books, not brains!

Great Old One

Possibly A Mermaid Queen

Such a nasty woman

Where have the last ten years gone?

Old Hand in the Biz

Eat books, not brains!

Becoming a laptop-human hybrid

Eat books, not brains!

punny user title, here

Eat books, not brains!

Eat books, not brains!

Such a nasty woman

Eat books, not brains!