Original vs. Editor's

With the exception of some work-for-hire projects, every word in my published books is my own (and my co-author's, of course).

What happens is the editor reads the book, and makes suggestions about changes. These come back to you in the infamous "revision letter."

You go through that, and decide what do to about the requests. Some of them, you slap your forehead and say "Why didn't I think of that?" Some of them it's "Well, why not?" Some of them you say "I see a better way." And some of them you say, "No way." You rewrite the novel with those in mind.

It's still your book. But it's better.

Let me give you an example. In The Apocalypse Door, the character "Simon" was added as a result of editorial suggestion. But I came up with him, and I added him. And it was the right thing to do.

When my revision letter comes, I skim the first paragraph. It always tells me that I'm the Queen of the Writing World. The second paragraph is the: let me soften the blow to come paragraph that starts out with the words - but we can make this a much stronger book. Sigh.

I take most of my editor's suggestions. She's, frankly, brilliant (in case she's reading this).

However, I once had to re-write a book from scratch because the editor didn't like it. So, I took some time, went to the coast in October, walked along the sand, and thought about it. I was really angry. Really, really angry. I was wearing this beautiful wool cloak and I looked like The French Lieutenant's Woman. Very dramatic. (I mention this only because I ended up with pneumonia. That'll teach me to sulk.)

Bottom line, I decided to re-write the book and it's always garnered raves. It's always mentioned as readers' favorite book. For those who know my books, it's After the Kiss. Who knows what can happen?

I had to completely revamp another book because it took place in the Restoration Era and my editor didn't like that timeframe. I submitted the revamp and it, too, was turned down. I literally re-wrote that book in two weeks. I hate that book to this day.

Bottom line (or is there a point to this and what is it?) publishing is a compromise business. There is no such thing as being true to my "art". I want to be published, so I'll seriously consider any criticism from the professionals. But that's the key. My agent and my editor are the only people who can give me advice. Oh, and more than five readers all saying the same thing.

James D. Macdonald said:

You go through that, and decide what do to about the requests. Some of them, you slap your forehead and say "Why didn't I think of that?" Some of them it's "Well, why not?" Some of them you say "I see a better way." And some of them you say, "No way." You rewrite the novel with those in mind.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

In the original ms. of The Arm of the Stone, there was a race of magical creatures that the hero encounters at various pivotal points in the book. My editor asked me to take them out because she felt the book had a more gritty, realistic atmosphere and the creatures didn't fit. She was absolutely right, but I didn't see it until she pointed it out. There was also a character she asked me to expand--which I did--and a scene she asked me to cut--which I didn't.

For The Burning Land I was asked to tighten the beginning, which the editor felt was too leisurely, by transferring some important background information from Chapter 2 into a prologue. I was reluctant--I really wanted to avoid the fantasy cliche of a prologue, but I saw her point about the book's slow start. I think I came up with a relatively uncliched way of presenting the prologue, but if I had my druthers Chapter 2 would be as I originally wrote it.

Two of my books I've been asked to completely revamp. One was my first novel, and it really needed the work; I learned a huge amount by doing it. The other, my third novel, was a victim of changes at the publisher. They sat on the manuscript for a while, and then told me they didn't like the second half of the story. I was angry, but rewriting was the only way I was going to get that sucker published, so I rewrote to my editor's detailed suggestions. It's my least favorite of all my books, and the only one that has gotten really negative reviews.

I've never had (nor do I need) line editing, but for my second novel, Worldstone, I had the Copy Editor from Hell who decided to rewrite for me, changing words, sentence structure, cutting entire paragraphs. I must have written STET about a thousand times. Last time around I had the Copy Editor from Heck who changed various of my style conventions in the first half of the ms. but not the second half, and missed some really major errors like a minor character with two different names. Of course, I missed that one too, but it's the CE's job to catch things like that. Luckily I spotted it in galleys.

- Victoria

Editors

EGGammon said:

FOR PUBLISHED WRITERS:

I was just curious of the differences in your original manuscript accepted by a publisher and the one that was edited by the publisher's editor (and released). Are there any MAJOR differences? Do you have any unique stories to tell about the "editing" process and what input you had? I think any stories will be helpful for us unpublished writers so we know what to expect WHEN our novels get published. (Plus the stories will be interesting. Who knows? This could be fun!)

Click to expand...

I've never actually had an editor ask for a revision on a novel, but I do deal with the usual editing. Most often, this just means tightening a bit. The editor may think this paragraph needs cut, and that scene is unnecessary, but it's always very minor. I do find most editors are right far more often than they're wrong. That's why they don't get fired.

I'm not sure any writer would actually let an editor rewrite his or her novel. The editor's job is to edit, not to rewrite or revise, though an editor can certainly suggest revisions.

As one editor said, "I'm not looking for writers who need to be rewritten; I'm looking for writers who can already write."

As for input, I've always had complete input. I'm the writer, so the writing decisions are mine.

Just about the only place where I can't really get my way is with length. If the editor says she wants a 100,000 word novel, I can't hand in a 300,000 word novel. If I do, she'll either reject it outright, or tell me to cut it down to 100,000 words. Unless a miracle happens and she loves it so much she fights to keep it at that length. I wouldn't ever count on this happening.

The upside of all this is that any novel you write really is your novel. The downside is that any novel you write really is your novel. No one is going to rewrite it for you. If it's good, an editor can and will make it just a little better, but if it's bad, it stays bad.

Good editors are extremly helpful in pointing out possibilities you missed, loopholes you didn't see, ect., but all the good ones do is point. If something needs changed, and the writer agrees, then the writer fixes it.

I have occasionally disagreed with an editor, and it's always been about whether or not something needs cut. Some editors seem determined to "murder my darlings." I usually let them, but not always.

It's good to remember that editors are human, which means there will be good and bad editors. But it's even better to remember that editors are human in another way. . .most are overworked and underpaid. An editor doesn't have the time or the energy to rewrite novels. Or the need, for that matter. Why spend your time rewriting when there are plenty of writers who don't need to be rewritten?

And like any other human, an editor would rather do no more work than is necessary, so the less editing, revising, and rewriting your novel needs, the greater the odds an editor will want it. This is particularly true when you're a new writer and the editor doesn't know whether or not you're capable or revising and rewriting a novel.

11th Hour was a sports drama with secondary thriller elements in its original form. There was a subplot involving a police investigation and a death, but the primary focus was on the mental effects of genetic engineering on a basically innocent person.

My editor at Kensington wanted the book the be a thriller with secondary sports drama elements. She recommended I expand the police murder investigation aspect of the book, and gave suggestions on how to do so. The primary change was the addition of a series of murders which would attract the police, as opposed to one semi-accidental death.

I also added another subplot to increase the tension, that of a rival corporation fighting for technological supremacy.

Otherwise, the only major changes involved the publisher all but demanding that I remove certain scenes that I personally loved, but which did not really advance the plot. I did so, hesitantly.

Scenes

RaptorBpW said:

Otherwise, the only major changes involved the publisher all but demanding that I remove certain scenes that I personally loved, but which did not really advance the plot. I did so, hesitantly.

Click to expand...

This has always been where editors asked me to make deletions. I've never had an editor demand that I remove a scene, but I have had them ask and argue and spend time trying to convince me. I find editors are usually right when they say a scene doesn't advance the the plot, so I go along as often as not, but I don't think every scene needs to advance the plot, so I don't always agree with such deletions, and I've always had the final say.

The shortest revision letter I ever got read, "Chapter Four doesn't work."

Do editorial letters from your agent count?

LOL

Shawn

In my first novel my editor suggested a different twist at the end, one that I had considered (but ultimately rejected) myself because a certain character seemed to be evolving along certain lines. The reason I didn't do it was because I wasn't sure it would work or that it played fair with the reader. My other books had only minor changes suggested and I made most of them. I don't recall having to put my foot down on anything but I did stet a lot of changes made by the copyeditor on my second one.

My one suggestion regarding the editing process: ALWAYS read through every edited version carefully, including the galleys, even if you feel like you can't bear to look at that book one more time and it means taking time away from your current work in progress. I was tempted with each book not to take the time to read it all the way through AGAIN! once I got to the galley stage. But I made myself do it anyway and each time I found huge errors that had somehow slipped by everyone in the first several rounds of editing.

Beth

It was a total contrast in both my non-fic books. The first one was edited by a brand-new editor, and she basically left every word intack. My second book was nearly 450 pages long and cut down to 225 pages, much to my shock and amazement.

Triceratops

cwfgal said:

My one suggestion regarding the editing process: ALWAYS read through every edited version carefully, including the galleys, even if you feel like you can't bear to look at that book one more time and it means taking time away from your current work in progress. I was tempted with each book not to take the time to read it all the way through AGAIN! once I got to the galley stage. But I made myself do it anyway and each time I found huge errors that had somehow slipped by everyone in the first several rounds of editing.

Click to expand...

Yup. There's always something.

I hate galleys. Partly it's the horror of reading One More Time. Partly it's that seeing the book typeset always points up (for me at least) a zillion things I wish I could fix. A friend suggested that to avoid the angst, I should try reading backward, from last page to first. That way you can catch the errors, but you don't actually have to read the thing. I think I'm going to do that next time.

- Victoria

victoriastrauss said:

Yup. There's always something.

I hate galleys. Partly it's the horror of reading One More Time. Partly it's that seeing the book typeset always points up (for me at least) a zillion things I wish I could fix. A friend suggested that to avoid the angst, I should try reading backward, from last page to first. That way you can catch the errors, but you don't actually have to read the thing. I think I'm going to do that next time.

- Victoria

Click to expand...

Brilliant idea.

Unfortunately, I tend to make errors in my somewhat brilliant stories. I can re-write til the cows come home, and probably will never be completely satisfied. In fact, I began perseverating on a few particular "that"s in the story, because I tend to want to avoid "that" like the curse. And I couldn't make up my mind whether or not removing "that from these particular sentences improved or worsened the sentences. I kept saying it outloud with and without the offending word, trying to make up my mind, but couldn't. I should have just flipped a stinking coin.

Well, yes, re-writes require re-reading, and after re-reading your own story enough times, you begin to get weary of it.

But there are few things as satisfying as to finish the re-writes, put it down and come back to it after a time, and read it fresh, to be tickled at how clever it is, "Wow, I wrote that?"

Nateskate said:

But there are few things as satisfying as to finish the re-writes, put it down and come back to it after a time, and read it fresh, to be tickled at how clever it is, "Wow, I wrote that?"

Click to expand...

I love those moments.

Shawn

I just had one of those moments while editing the first draft of my second novel. I was like..."Hey, this is farking Elmore Leonard stuff!"

More often I look back at my work and sigh at how pathetic it is---even if it's not. I'm my own worst critic.

In my second book, I ended up totally rewriting the last 100 pages from scratch because of a pretty big plot point that my editors wanted changed - but they were absolutely right about it! The way I'd written it the first time was...the easy way out. The big plot change they wanted made the book so much stronger.

That said, Superromance does tend to line edit very heavily. Very heavily! And sometimes they do rewrite things. I get most upset when someone sticks in words that my characters would never use in a million years. I always rechange those. :Smack: When I got my first set of line edits, I swear, there was only ONE page out of 335 ms pages that had no changes on it.

I cried. <G> I thought I must truly suc* if they had to edit me like that. I wondered why on earth they'd even bought the book if it was that bad.

Then I talked to some other Superromance authors and found out that this was SOP for Super. Phew. (This is why on-line communities of authors are so important! And even though I had other friends who write for other H/S lines, this is just how Super does it - so I needed to be able to touch base with other Super writers.)

Susan G.

That

Nateskate said:

Brilliant idea.

fact, I began perseverating on a few particular "that"s in the story, because I tend to want to avoid "that" like the curse. And I couldn't make up my mind whether or not removing "that from these particular sentences improved or worsened the sentences. I kept saying it outloud with and without the offending word, trying to make up my mind, but couldn't. I should have just flipped a stinking coin.

Click to expand...

I used to have the same problem with "that." I finally decided that if a sentence made sense with the word "that," if it still said what I intended to say, then it was an unnecessary word and should be eliminated.

I'm an editor rather than a published writer (though hopefully one day I'll get to be the latter too!). In my experience, it will depend quite a bit on the type of book. The only fiction editing experience I have is copy-editing a few erotic novels and mostly all I had to do there was correct spelling errors and little grammatical errors, look for inconsistencies (e.g. a character having huge boobs on page 5 and tiny, pert ones on page 60!) and mark up the manuscript for typesetting. Plot holes weren't terribly problematic, as the plot really wasn't the point of the book! (That does seem to be changing, fortunately, in erotic fiction these days.)

In non-fiction publishing (specifically educational publishing, as that's my main field of experience), though, you tend to do a lot more. Usually the publisher/commissioning editor will ask for a number of changes during the writing process (e.g. you need to add a paragraph on X to this chapter; you need to change it so it's directed at the student, rather than teacher; etc.). Often a specialist reader will then look at it and may ask for new bits to be added or chunks to be changed. All this generally happens in consultation with you.

Then it comes to someone like me (copy editor). How much we do to the manuscript will depend on a number of things:
1) How much of the above redrafting there has been time for. If there hasn't been much, we have to do some of that - usually by asking you to make specific changes, but in some circumstances we may be given the go-ahead to make these changes ourselves.
2) How good a writer you are. If your writing is clear and fit for the purpose and audience, then it generally won't be changed too much. However, if, for example, the book is aimed at low-level or younger students and your writing is full of long words, it will be changed a fair bit to make it understandable to them.
3) How far you have managed to write to the publishing house's house style. Generally, on being commissioned you would be provided with a house style and you should take that into account in your writing. If you've completely (or slighly) ignored this house style then everything that doesn't fit into it will be changed (e.g. -ize endings to -ise endings; serial commas removed or put in; hyphenation/capitalisation fixed; etc.).
4) Whether your work is part of a multi-author book. Sometimes this doesn't matter and it's fine to have different authorial styles for different chapters. But in educational publishing, you have to think about the user - i.e. the pupil/student - and it is often necessary to rewrite or restructure so that the book as a whole is more consistent. For example, using similarly worded instructions throughout.

The main thing is that, in non-fiction publishing, where you have been commissioned to write a book, if you follow all the instructions you are provided with and are able to write to the audience, there will be very little that needs changing. If you aren't able to follow these instructions, you might be astounded at the difference between your original manuscript and the final published version.

(This isn't terribly useful for novel writers, of course, although writing to the audience is still important.)

For y'all's amazement and amusement! The complete text of a genuine revision letter! (Redacted so you won't be able to figure out which book.) (Your mileage may vary; not all stocks increase in value.)

=====================

Issues for discussion.

** I'm not sure [male character]'s progression through the story justifies his seemingly sudden ascension in the final chapter. We may need to show more evidence of his growing powers throughout the second half of the story. Thoughts/comments?-

** The notion of the [medical facility] seems dated. Are you convinced this is the right setting, and why?

** I'm not convinced [female charatcer] is an essential character. Play "what-if" for a moment and consider cutting this character from the story. Thoughts/comments?

** The mythology of [book title] is massive. Perhaps the largest bit of world-building I've seen in decades. We need to do a better job of establishing the mythos early, especially with regard to the [fantasy creature] hierarchies. Thoughts, comments? (You go first, then I'll take a turn)

** Although the human characters are definitely the stars of the show, some of the most powerful scenes involve conflict between the supernatural elements. We need to include an additional scene or two highlighting these very complex and compelling characters. Give it some thought and let's discuss on Thursday.

James D. Macdonald said:

For y'all's amazement and amusement! The complete text of a genuine revision letter! (Redacted so you won't be able to figure out which book.) (Your mileage may vary; not all stocks increase in value.)

=====================

Issues for discussion.

** I'm not sure [male character]'s progression through the story justifies his seemingly sudden ascension in the final chapter. We may need to show more evidence of his growing powers throughout the second half of the story. Thoughts/comments?-

** The notion of the [medical facility] seems dated. Are you convinced this is the right setting, and why?

** I'm not convinced [female charatcer] is an essential character. Play "what-if" for a moment and consider cutting this character from the story. Thoughts/comments?

** The mythology of [book title] is massive. Perhaps the largest bit of world-building I've seen in decades. We need to do a better job of establishing the mythos early, especially with regard to the [fantasy creature] hierarchies. Thoughts, comments? (You go first, then I'll take a turn)

** Although the human characters are definitely the stars of the show, some of the most powerful scenes involve conflict between the supernatural elements. We need to include an additional scene or two highlighting these very complex and compelling characters. Give it some thought and let's discuss on Thursday.

Click to expand...

To me, that's very encouraging. The idea that the publisher will take what, in their eyes, is an imperfect novel, and work with the author to get it ready for market... it's beautiful.

Obviously you have to be good to ever receive such a letter, but I can't imagine balking at it.

victoriastrauss said:

Yup. There's always something.

I hate galleys. Partly it's the horror of reading One More Time. Partly it's that seeing the book typeset always points up (for me at least) a zillion things I wish I could fix. A friend suggested that to avoid the angst, I should try reading backward, from last page to first. That way you can catch the errors, but you don't actually have to read the thing. I think I'm going to do that next time.

- Victoria

Click to expand...

Reading backwards is also a great technique I learned in school, for editing and catching errors of your own work. So you're not influenced by what your brain tells you what "the sentence/word should be," but instead what it actually IS.

I love the comments here. After I went through my editing process (which could be rough at first because of various things), I can tell that the book IS better. It's not like it was bad and unpublishable before, but a good editor would always help to make the book better. Also, all the words are still mine. I'm the one who makes the changes. And I echo Jim's comment: there are those "why didn't I think of that?" or "it does make the book better" moments.

Not to say there are things I would "reject." When an editor tries to change your style, I think that's a warning sigh. A good editor should not impose his or her style on the writer. Instead, I think he should respect the writer's style but work with her on improving it. I think a good editor can help in many ways:

1. Serve as the ultimate reader's advocate (for characters, plot, story, etc)
2. Suggest better word choices
3. Suggest places for clarification, expansion or tightening... paring down purple proses or run-on sentences, etc.
4. Make sure everything including style, characters, settings, etc are consistent


The best compliment I have for my editor is that after the whole process, when I read the book again, it didn't read like someone else had written or butchered it. It's still 100% mine. It's simply better.

Editor's Letter

Thank you for posting that, Mr McDonald. It is eerily like the one I had recently from my editor. They cannot possibly be one and the same person (since I am a YA writer living in England) and yet...hmmm. Hive mind? Borg collective? No. They must just both be very good at their jobs.

I feel like a bit of a traitor saying this but - am I the only one who actually enjoys re-writes? I look forward to them.

Zolah said:

I feel like a bit of a traitor saying this but - am I the only one who actually enjoys re-writes? I look forward to them.

Click to expand...

You're not the only one. I like rewriting too. In fact, I like it better than writing.

- Victoria