Is it the ideas, the writing or both?
- Thread starter FataMorgana
- Start date
This is quite possibly the funniest thing I've heard all day.
Lemme ask you this: if your friend is such a genius, why aren't they writing books instead of editing them? Show us all how it's done?
MacAllister
Tired and worried.
El Jefe
Administrator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
VPX
Super Member
Registered
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 22,039
- Reaction score
- 10,839
- Location
- Out on a limb
- Website
- macallisterstone.com
What bestselling author is going to someone who does "editing on the side" for help?
That's why I chose this career path. I have no actual talent, but a very active imagination, so I thought it was a brilliant plan.
That's why I chose this career path. I have no actual talent, but a very active imagination, so I thought it was a brilliant plan.
Your friend is either a liar or a fool. He's not only exaggerating, he doesn't have the first clue what he's talking about. He's a dunce.
And, no, there is no such thing as an idea market. If you could sell ideas for a penny a million, you'd still be charging far too much. Ideas are worthless. There is no such thing as a good idea, and no such thing as a bad idea. All that matters is how well the idea is executed. Any writer already has enough ideas to last five lifetimes. The hard part, the part that takes talent and skill and discipline, is turning those ideas into good books.
I don't often agree with Mr. Ritchie, but this is raw truth right here. Well-said, James.
You know, I have read in a lot of Author's Thanks where they say, thanks to the editor for making my book readable..or something to that effect. I wonder if they are just being humble.....
Yeah the part where he says "good ideas are what really count" is just plain bull.
But I don't think the problem is that he's a blowhard or a liar, I think he's overestimating the actual amount of change goes into a good polish. A good editing experience from a fresh set of eyes and a knowledgeable editor can make a HUGE difference to your work, but that doesn't mean the actual change is nearly as HUGE. I think your friend mistook that for thinking that the original author couldn't write when it's just the way the editing process works, honing something raw but fundamentally sound into something that shines. It sounds like he hasn't done much writing himself @_@
But I don't think the problem is that he's a blowhard or a liar, I think he's overestimating the actual amount of change goes into a good polish. A good editing experience from a fresh set of eyes and a knowledgeable editor can make a HUGE difference to your work, but that doesn't mean the actual change is nearly as HUGE. I think your friend mistook that for thinking that the original author couldn't write when it's just the way the editing process works, honing something raw but fundamentally sound into something that shines. It sounds like he hasn't done much writing himself @_@
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2007
- Messages
- 20,006
- Reaction score
- 5,353
Let me put it to you this way. If the writing is that bad, it never makes it to the editor's desk. I have writers I've worked with for years, and if they send me a crappy manuscript, I reject it. I certainly don't rewrite the book for them.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2007
- Messages
- 8,049
- Reaction score
- 772
- Location
- Clearlake Park, CA
- Website
- www.strokingthepen.com
I swear he said that. I didn't make it up
Thanks everybody.
Your friend is lying and does not know what he's talking about.
James is right on about there being no idea market out there. All ideas are reusable, recyclable, and used a million times over. It's all about the spin.
Well, he might just be trying to make his job seem more interesting. He doesn't know that the OP writes, or has access to editors, and people who know them. It's not like he was trying to sell his editing services to an unsuspecting writer. He's just trying impress. : )
It does sound like a sweeping generalisation that borders on the nonsensical, but I'm sure there are cases. The only one I'm familiar with, because I guess these things aren't generally made publically available, is the work of Raymond Carver, one of the most respected short story writers of the 20th century. His collection of short stories, What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, was heavily edited by Gordon Lish, and the difference made by Lish was massive. I believe the collection has recently been published in its original form as Beginners. I used to have a link to a web page that showed the degree of editing performed by Lish on one of the stories, but can't find it right now. Worth hunting for though.
So I can believe that there are cases. I've no idea how widespread it might be, though. But I would distance myself from claims that he's lying, as some have suggested.
Edit: Here's a link, it's up at the New Yorker web site:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/2007/12/24/071224on_onlineonly_carver?currentPage=all
So I can believe that there are cases. I've no idea how widespread it might be, though. But I would distance myself from claims that he's lying, as some have suggested.
Edit: Here's a link, it's up at the New Yorker web site:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/2007/12/24/071224on_onlineonly_carver?currentPage=all
Last edited:
No, the writers are not being humble. A good editor does help greatly, but he helps by offering suggestions, not by doing any of the writing. Editors edit, writers write, and when an editor makes a suggestion, it's always up to the writer to make the changes.
An editor who rewrites is bad editor. You friend just doesn't get it. A good editor is one who has good ideas, and those ideas can make the book better. Sometimes a lot better. But the writer is the one with the writing talent to execute those ideas.
I thank my editor in the acknowledgements for my next book. Not because she rewrote any of it, but the poor woman had to put up with my ellipsis addiction. She brought things to my attention, then left it to me to correct things. I think she's been patient and good-humoured in the way she's brought my bad habits to light, which is why I said 'thank you'.
Editing is not writing. Editing is most cutting. Lish cut the bejeeebers out of Carver's stories, and I really wish he'd left most of them alone.
Funny. How well do you know this person? Ridiculous, grandiose claims are typical of psychopaths, which isn't to say that others don't make them.
There is no such thing as an idea market, btw, because ideas are a dime a dozen; they're also not copyrightable. It's the execution that counts, not the bright idea.
... back in Hemingway's time editors took more active roles. These days they just don't have the time for that. Even one misspelled word in a manuscript is enough to get an editor yelling, "Idiot!"
Lish clearly did far more than cut, though he did plenty of that.
I don't.
I think your friend is exaggerating at best - but what the previous replies don't take into account is that there are several different kinds of "editor":
1. Acquisitions editor. This is the person we writers think of as The Editor, the person who chooses our manuscript and sees it through to publication. This kind of editor will suggest changes but expect the writer to do the actual work.
2. Production editor (what I used to do in my pre-internet days). The person who organises the typesetting, proof-reading and printing of the book. Not so exciting as #1, but much easier to get a job in!
3. Copy editor. Often a freelancer, this person checks the manuscript for factual errors and inconsistencies (e.g. a character's eye colour changing mid-book).
4. Proofreader. Usually a freelancer, checks for spelling and punctuation errors, etc. Not called an editor by anyone in the trade, but overlaps with #3 so I include the role for completeness.
Some writers will hire a professional proofreader or copyeditor before submitting a manuscript to ensure that their work meets the standards that acquisition editors expect. If your friend does this, he may well see some horrendous prose - but I doubt that "famous authors" make much use of part-timers...
Last edited:
I've had fourteen novels published by mid to large publishers, and I've worked as an editor. I did take all types of editors into account.
Unfortunately, many new writers do hire "editors" to read and edit a manuscript before submitting it. Said "editors" almost always screw up more than they fix, and as an editor, I HATE it when a writer mentions in a query letter that he's done thins. It's a complete waste of time, the percentage of manuscripts that sell after such editing is actually lower than that of manuscripts that are not "edited", and it's just another way for writers to lose money.
And while they do exist, I've never had a freelance copy editor at a publisher.
Production editor is interesting. I've dealt with production editors in Hollywood, but while a similar position exists at some of the publishers I've sold to and work for, it doesn't exist at all at the others. They simply use a "typesetter" who, along with the copy editor, has all the responsibilities of what would be a production editor somewhere else, even though type hasn't been set in many years.
But at most of the publishers I've sold to, only two editors do all the work, the acquisition editor, and the copy editor.
But none of these editors is allowed to rewrite anything in my books. Sadly, some editor think they can write, and can screw up a good book fast. Fortunately, the writer can always change what the editor changed, and can STET everything, if need be.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,632
- Reaction score
- 1,204
- Location
- London, UK
- Website
- torgoblog.blogspot.com
True, but better go too far than not far enough, don't you think?
Actually I have psychopaths on the brain----been researching. It's like when you're pregnant, all you notice are other pregnant women...well, not you personally.
Lovely bit of doggerel on your website, btw.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,632
- Reaction score
- 1,204
- Location
- London, UK
- Website
- torgoblog.blogspot.com
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 7,640
- Reaction score
- 2,900