What happens after your novel is accepted by a publisher?

Like every answer here, it depends. But I shall tell you the tale of my MS.

After acceptance, a few months later I got some edits from my editor. These were related more to structure, and keeping the pace going, not really grammar and spelling or anything. After I believe 3 rounds like this (and I know it sounds like a lot, but in the end, little was changed. My book was quite structurally sound, and most work was for pacing purposes), I then got the copy-edits from my copy-editor. THESE were the grammar/spelling edits, and there were not really all that many of them. Then I got the proofs, ie the pages typed up to look how they may look eventually in the book, and I read over those with a fine toothed comb. Then I got the proofs again.

And remember I was doing this with two houses, the british and american ones, so it was double the fun. (actually some people wonder why some authors don't read their books when they come out finally, at least I always wondered, I think I know now. It's one because they are worried they might find an error they missed [which will invariably happen] and two because they have read their book over so many times already!)

I believe now I may actually be done editing.

Covers I had a bit of say on, but not much. They would change a few things here or there, but really it was marketing's decision. And there was a back and forth about my title (I have two different ones, a la Harry Potter). I have also been sent a few questionnaires from the various houses to answer, and sent them author photos.

As for getting blurbs, I can't really speak to that as it isn't as common with children's books, but yes lots of authors do that. They get several galleys (ARCs - advance reading copy - uncorrected proofs bound to look like a soft covered book), write convincing letters, and then send off their MSs to various authors etc. Many publishers do that too. Right now my publishers are sending my ARCs out to various people to create buzz I guess you could say.

In general also the author is working at her own PR. Blogging, or networking, getting a website up and running. This isn't to say that the publishers do nothing, but why wouldn't you want to put as much effort into promoting your work (gosh I sound like a shill for PA!)?

Anyway, I hope this helped some. If you have any more questions, please feel free to ask! This is my first time going through all this, so it's all a bit new and exciting to me!

How a bill becomes a law...

After I acquire a book, I call the author and have an initial conversation of the "I am here to help you and this will be fun and not scary and here's my phone number" variety. Assuming I made the offer based on a complete manuscript, my process is something like this:

I take some time to reread the manuscript, making lots of notes about how I think the book should be revised. This is structural revision, not the line-editing that will come later. Just because I thought it was perfect when I bought it doesn't mean I'm not going to try to make it more perfect now . I type all my notes up into an editorial letter, which can range anywhere from a couple of pages to twenty, depending on the state of the manuscript and how detailed I wound up getting. (Some editors prefer to do this part in a phone call, but I like sending a letter first.)

I send the letter off to the author, give her some time to think about it, and then we have a call to make sure she feels comfortable with my suggestions and clear on how she's going to proceed. If she disagrees with some of my points, we talk about that, and look for other ways to address whatever the core issue was. Then she has a certain amount of time (depending on our publication schedule) to return to me a revised manuscript.

When I get the revisions back, if all's gone well, I don't need to have the author do another round. Now I reread the manuscript again, concentrating on line-editing issues; these can include cutting or inserting text, moving sections around so that they're more effective, or very basic things like word choice or spelling. Once that's done, I hand the marked-up manuscript over to our copyeditors.

(Some editors also send a copy of the line-edited ms. to the author at this point; others wait until the ms. comes back with the copyeditor's marks as well.) When the copyedited ms. is complete, it'll reflect my edits as well as the copyeditor's (whose job it is to correct grammar, etc., but also to watch for errors of continuity, check facts and proper names, and mark up the text for the compositor). This goes back to the author, so that she can review my line edit and answer any queries the copyeditor had.

When the author returns the ms., it's ready to be typeset--back to production it goes, and eventually I get two sets of page proofs, with the copyedited text all typed up and laid out more or less the way it will look in the finished book. One of these sets goes to the author, who has a chance to look it over and make any small corrections that didn't happen previously. The next things my author will see are bound galleys (made from the uncorrected page proofs) and then the finished book. (There's a "second pass" round of page proofs, but I don't generally send those to the author unless there were many corrections to the first pass--usually I just check them over myself.)

Whew! Sorry that was so long, but I hope it helps!

Boy, Crinklish, I like your style. I read once that Gary Fisketjon makes an enormous amount of marginal notes on the ms., and then sends it back to the author and they can either change what he's suggested or not. I imagine if Fisketjon wants it changed, it probably gets changed. Unless, of course, its Richard Ford.

Harold Underdown has a new article on his site about the process that is worth a look-see.

It's here: http://www.underdown.org/acquisition-process.htm

You dance some.

I can't add much to what Crinklish and Toothpaste (either a cartoon or a German synth band) said above, but here's something interesting that happened to me.

My book was on its way to auction. I had six companies interested: Henry Holt, Mira, Warner, Avon, Ballantine, Crown/Shaye Areheart.

Three dropped out before the auction, and so it was decided that on a Thursday morning, the auction would take place.

Then one of the companies made what's called a "pre-empt" bid, trying to keep it out of auction. The bid was for quite a bit of money...HOWEVER the company wanted to control foreign rights if I agreed to take the pre-empt.

My agent told me I could do whatever I wanted to do, but there was already a lot of foreign buzz about the book. If a publishing company controls foreign rights, then whatever they sell goes against my advance. I have to earn out to get my share of that money. (It's more complicated than that, surely, but that's how I understand it.)

So I turned down, allowed my agency to sell the foreign rights for me, and we went to auction.

And it actually worked out in my favor. I still got a good deal from the American publisher, and I get to keep 80% of any foreign money I earn. I have to date earned more money (before commission and taxes) than I would have if I would have taken the pre-empt offer.

None of that is important, really, but anyway.

Will, I always wondered about the foreign rights stuff. I'm glad it worked out for you. Did your agent give you any advice, like, "keep control of the foreign rights, Will."

gerrydodge said:

Will, I always wondered about the foreign rights stuff. I'm glad it worked out for you. Did your agent give you any advice, like, "keep control of the foreign rights, Will."

Click to expand...

No, she pretty much let me do what I thought was best.

She laid out very clearly what could happen, though, and it turned out that she was exactly right.

Book

I doubt it ever works exactly the same way twice, and I doubt any two editors have the exact process. Some books still need major rewrites and revisions, even after acceptance, while others need only a brief trim for length. Some books need line editing, some don't.

I don't think a good editor ever messes with a writer's style, and you should have the grammar pretty much correct before you ever submit a novel.

Jamesaritchie said:

II don't think a good editor ever messes with a writer's style, and you should have the grammar pretty much correct before you ever submit a novel.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure, but it's my feeling that less editing is done with genre than literary fiction.

Not that genre deserves less attention. It's just that if the book isn't pretty much ready to go, an editor isn't going to acquire it in the first place. They just don't have time to do intensive work on a romance or fantasy with "potential."

My ms was line edited, (lightly) then went straight into copyediting, then the copy edited ms came back to me with minor editorial suggestions that I could address by penciling changes in the margins, along with with a few inserts, and I think that's not an unusual scenario.

rugcat said:

I'm not sure, but it's my feeling that less editing is done with genre than literary fiction.

Click to expand...

Speaking of that.

Did anyone see the article on Harlan Coben in this month's issue of The Atlantic Monthly?

Coben says he doesn't hardly edit at all, nor does his editor. He writes a book every nine months, submits it, and it goes to print.

He also talked about how much money he makes. His first book earned him $2,000. Now he makes 3 or 4 million from every book he publishes.

Another interesting thing he said -- and it's something I agree with -- was that people hate author readings. He recommended that writers talk about writing and the publishing business at meet-and-greets rather than reading from their books. Good advice, probably, if you're a genre author.

Will Lavender said:

He also talked about how much money he makes. His first book earned him $2,000. Now he makes 3 or 4 million from every book he publishes.

Click to expand...

Great! Now I have something to look forward to.

Will Lavender said:

Another interesting thing he said -- and it's something I agree with -- was that people hate author readings. He recommended that writers talk about writing and the publishing business at meet-and-greets rather than reading from their books. Good advice, probably, if you're a genre author.

Click to expand...

But hopefully, there are going to be a few people at least who are not familiar with your book and would enjoy a taste of it. A short reading, ten minutes max, followed by Q&A, and some talk about writing and publishing might be the way to go.

Very cool thread, y'all.

I'm with rugrat in that I too like a taste of the book at an author meet-n-greet. But just a taste, almost like an intro to the evening. Then a q&a session would be fab. I've gone to a few like that and they were great. I've also attended the odd one where it was just a reading, nothing more, and I felt a little cheated since I believe you want to see and hear something of the author you can't get from their books.

I went to a reading once where the author refused to chat, or answer questions, or even just tell us a little about himself. He just came in, sat on a stool facing us, read one entire chapter, then walked out.

I didn't buy his book.

Will Lavender said:

Speaking of that.

Did anyone see the article on Harlan Coben in this month's issue of The Atlantic Monthly?

Coben says he doesn't hardly edit at all, nor does his editor. He writes a book every nine months, submits it, and it goes to print.

He also talked about how much money he makes. His first book earned him $2,000. Now he makes 3 or 4 million from every book he publishes.

Another interesting thing he said -- and it's something I agree with -- was that people hate author readings. He recommended that writers talk about writing and the publishing business at meet-and-greets rather than reading from their books. Good advice, probably, if you're a genre author.

Click to expand...

Get it right, and you don't have to edit, and neither does your editor. This is not at all uncommon with good writers. Ideally, all an editor should have to do is say, "Great job." The less work you leave for an editor, the better.

But he's wrong about author readings. Both readings and talks draw their own audience.

See, I love hearing an author read his/her own work. You get a completely different flavor.

Personally, I'm planning on making prank phone calls to everyone who thought I'd never make it.

I love reading fiction; you won't find a bigger lover of books and literature than I am.

But I'm not big on listening to people read prose aloud.

In fact, it bores the hell out of me.

Will Lavender said:

But I'm not big on listening to people read prose aloud.

In fact, it bores the hell out of me.

Click to expand...

I've been to readings like that, and a few that were wildly entertaining. Last August I caught the MSN video of Harry, Carrie & Garp and Steven King gave an awesome reading. Irving and Rowling were no slouches either.

MDSchafer said:

Personally, I'm planning on making prank phone calls to everyone who thought I'd never make it.

Click to expand...

The phone bill would bankrupt me.