# Life, politics, editing, quilting, debate, ethics, popcorn, and etc.



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

I've seen far too many of the pro-editing threads lately. Where are the people who are strictly anti-editing? The 100% DIY'ers?

Seems the board shifts back and forth every couple of days, or maybe the anti-editing folks are on a hiatus.


----------



## 39179 (Mar 16, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> I've seen far too many of the pro-editing threads lately. Where are the people who are strictly anti-editing? The 100% DIY'ers?
> 
> Seems the board shifts back and forth every couple of days, or maybe the anti-editing folks are on a hiatus.


I'm not sure I understand quite why you created this thread?


----------



## D. Nathan Hilliard (Jun 5, 2010)

Define "anti-editing". I don't use a professional editor, but I do use an entire circle of proofreaders who I value so much that I dedicate my books to them on the dedication page.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Perhaps they have no reason to respond?


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

D. Nathan Hilliard said:


> Define "anti-editing". I don't use a professional editor, but I do use an entire circle of proofreaders who I value so much that I dedicate my books to them on the dedication page.


Well, it's cyclic in nature, really. One week, you'll have the folks who absolutely hate the idea of paying for editing, and they'll come out in force. Then, the next week, you have the pro-editing people coming out en masse.

It's sort of like living near a major government building, like Congress. Different protesters each week, but it goes on like clockwork.



Andrew Biss said:


> I'm not sure I understand quite why you created this thread?


Ah, I'm far removed from having a real purpose for making threads. I'm not nearly as profound as some others here and may, from time to time, do things solely for either sentimental or entertainment reasons.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Brian, don't you remember when I did my blog rant about how I'm ain't your beta reader and called people who sell unedited work scam artists? Duuuuude. We got a manifesto thread on KB because of that post...

If you want, I can go do a follow-up, so that I can bring them out of the woodwork. Just don't tell Betsy.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Brian, don't you remember when I did my blog rant about how I'm ain't your beta reader and called people who sell unedited work scam artists? Duuuuude. We got a manifesto thread on KB because of that post...
> 
> If you want, I can go do a follow-up, so that I can bring them out of the woodwork. Just don't tell Betsy.


LOL! I can't remember if I saw it or not. If it was the week before last, I was in the hospital, and a few things prior to the hospital are a little fuzzy now. Link me up and I'll know for sure if I saw it before.

*gets some fancy fabrics and tosses it out the window* That should keep Betsy busy for a little while whilst we discuss things.


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

Totally anti-editing. Write something once while watching TV and having a conversation on Twitter, find a random stock image, and throw that bad boy up $4.99. I am confident in my skillz.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> LOL! I can't remember if I saw it or not. If it was the week before last, I was in the hospital, and a few things prior to the hospital are a little fuzzy now. Link me up and I'll know for sure if I saw it before.
> 
> *gets some fancy fabrics and tosses it out the window* That should keep Betsy busy for a little while whilst we discuss things.


Twas a while ago. Will DM you.


----------



## ETS PRESS (Nov 4, 2011)

I'll play. If you are going to be 100% indie, then you should do it all the way. No half a**ing it (as my grandma used to say). If you going to self-publish, then by all means DIY everything. You can get free editing from reviewers on Amazon. There are plenty of reviewers who will be happy to tell you that you have a typo, misspelled word, or grammatical error. You don't need to pay someone hundreds of dollars to edit your work. They are just scam artists anyway. Someone's bound to find a typo after you've paid someone big dollars to find the typos first.  

(Tongue firmly planted in cheek.)

That being said -I'm pretty close to 100% DIY. I am fortunate to know a few English teachers, and a freelance editor (who is awesome). I think many indies simply don't have the money to pay professional editors. It's not ideal, but it can be done on a shoestring, if you recruit a large team of qualified volunteers. Your skill level as a writer coming into this thing makes a difference as well. It's pretty much a no-brainer that writers are expected to submit ready-to-go or almost (as in very close) manuscripts to traditional publishers these days as well. As writers, we have to learn to polish our work to near perfection no matter what route we take.


----------



## John Daulton (Feb 28, 2012)

Danielle Kazemi said:


> Totally anti-editing. Write something once while watching TV and having a conversation on Twitter, find a random stock image, and throw that bad boy up $4.99. I am confident in my skillz.


THIS!


----------



## Ian Marks (Jan 22, 2012)

I've always taken a perverse pride in doing things myself, so when my first book goes live in a month or so, it will be self-edited.

But really, that's just because of my deeply-ingrained tightwaddedness. I can't bear the thought of paying someone else to do something I'm convinced I could do just as well on my own. 

I know that some people say that misteaks are hardr to sea when their you're own, but thats just silly.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

BrianKittrell said:


> *gets some fancy fabrics and tosses it out the window* That should keep Betsy busy for a little while whilst we discuss things.


Dude, seriously? Do you know how much fabric I have?

Betsy


----------



## Gregory Lynn (Aug 9, 2011)

If anyone wishes to pay me to make your characters out of cardboard, insert plot holes, and make your grammar wrinklier than your grandma then I'm game.


----------



## A. Rosaria (Sep 12, 2010)

I pay an editor when I have the money to do so, it just saves so much time if someone else correct my work. To have a piece of text remotely error free it takes me about three times the amount to write it. I'm low on cash and at the moment can only afford a copy-editor at most.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Don't believe Gregory Lynn. I'm the one who founded and developed the true and genuine Jedi-class _de-editing process_. I can make your book suck so bad your own mother won't read it. I guarantee it will be unsaleable. And my rates are competitive.


----------



## flipside (Dec 7, 2011)

Brian, what kind of editing are you talking about?

A lot of the pro-self publishing authors (i.e. Dean Wesley Smith) for example are anti-developmental editing, but I don't think any reasonable, sane author will complain against copyediting.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

BrianKittrell said:


> Well, it's cyclic in nature, really. One week, you'll have the folks who absolutely hate the idea of paying for editing, and they'll come out in force. Then, the next week, you have the pro-editing people coming out en masse.


So, wouldn't that be 'self-editing' instead of 'anti-editing'?


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> I've seen far too many of the pro-editing threads lately. Where are the people who are strictly anti-editing? The 100% DIY'ers?
> 
> Seems the board shifts back and forth every couple of days, or maybe the anti-editing folks are on a hiatus.


I'm not anti anything and believe it's each to his own, but here's a thought.

Contrary to common belief and bitching on different forums, books with grammatical, spelling and typo errors can still go viral, I am sure you can all come up with examples. If not viral, they can still earn more than the average edited and proofread book if the story is strong. Some of these books have sold so well that publishers have contracted them.


----------



## Tinker (Oct 3, 2011)

Danielle Kazemi said:


> Totally anti-editing. Write something once while watching TV and having a conversation on Twitter, find a random stock image, and throw that bad boy up $4.99. I am confident in my skillz.


You forgot to create a new genre: howabout "Organic Writing"? No added editing. Nothing but the finest manure.

@ETS Press. Shall we have a new acronym too? TIC.

Julia


----------



## Lexi Revellian (May 31, 2010)

BrianKittrell said:


> I've seen far too many of the pro-editing threads lately. Where are the people who are strictly anti-editing? The 100% DIY'ers?
> 
> Seems the board shifts back and forth every couple of days, or maybe the anti-editing folks are on a hiatus.


The thing is, it sounds smug to say, "I don't need an editor (though I use beta readers) or a proofreader - I'm capable of doing that myself." You might as well say, "Hey, I can handle my drink - it doesn't affect my driving," for the reaction it will get.

No one believes you, so why post to get jumped on?

Lexi

(Who may, or may not, do her own proofreading and editing. I'm admitting nothing.)


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

BrianKittrell said:


> I've seen far too many of the pro-editing threads lately. Where are the people who are strictly anti-editing? The 100% DIY'ers?
> 
> Seems the board shifts back and forth every couple of days, or maybe the anti-editing folks are on a hiatus.


Having been on KB since March 2009, there are several recurring (like burping garlic) threads, including Free vs. Paid, $ .99 vs $1,000.00, one-star review "why me! Why me", editing rants, see my cover, critique mt cover, cover my cover, and I'm Bambi caught in the headlights. Shifting is eternal and as such will taste more and more like the garlic.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Dude, seriously? Do you know how much fabric I have?
> Betsy


non-quilters never get how much fabric quilters have... That said, if Betsy doesn't want it, I'll take it. *she who dies with the most fabric WINS!*

Seriously, I have a friend (no really-- I do have a friend!) who is single, lives in a 4 bedroom home, and 2 of the bedrooms are for her fabric stash. Custom shelving everywhere.


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2012)

BrianKittrell said:


> *gets some fancy fabrics and tosses it out the window* That should keep Betsy busy for a little while whilst we discuss things.


I don't know why, but this reminds me of the Ravenloft vampires that all have those weird weaknesses. Like the gnomish vampires that could be tricked to stop chasing you by throwing something shiny at them. They would have to make a Will Save or stop chasing their prey and pick up the shiny to admire it.

I just imagine a vampire version of Betsy being repelled by colorful squares of fabric.

Sorry, my geekness is showing.


----------



## SentientSurfer (Sep 20, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> Well, it's cyclic in nature, really. One week, you'll have the folks who absolutely hate the idea of paying for editing, and they'll come out in force. Then, the next week, you have the pro-editing people coming out en masse.


Eh? They don't hate the idea of paying for it, they claim they can't afford it. If they could afford it, they'd 'buy' it (so they claim). Others say you don't need to pay for editing to get good editing. Once again, they aren't against the idea of paying for it, they just think that paid services are unnecessary.

All of those threads are dull as dry as drywall, and don't really require a reply beyond reading the subject line.

I don't think I've ever seen an 'anti' editing thread on these boards, but you've been here longer than I have. Start one. It could be a neat read. . .Or it could just be a regurgitation of this thread with comically lame mizspellingzs


----------



## Michael Robertson Jr (Feb 24, 2011)

It's a mixed bag no matter how you look at it. How many times have we seen "I need an editor, I'm getting bad reviews because of typos" and then turn around and see "Help! I paid $400 dollars to have my book edited and people are still finding mistakes!"

You just have to roll the dice and do what you can and feel comfortable with to make the book the best you can make it. Period. This will be different for everyone.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

BTackitt said:


> non-quilters never get how much fabric quilters have... That said, if Betsy doesn't want it, I'll take it. *she who dies with the most fabric WINS!*
> 
> Seriously, I have a friend (no really-- I do have a friend!) who is single, lives in a 4 bedroom home, and 2 of the bedrooms are for her fabric stash. Custom shelving everywhere.


No, seriously, I'd have to add an addition just to take Brian's fabric. 

Betsy


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

I'm all for paying for copy editing, but I'm sort of against paying for content editing.  Especially if you have a fan base that is willing to beta read for free.  Your fans are all that matter, and their opinion should be valued over a professional editor.


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2012)

Michael Robertson Jr said:


> "Help! I paid $400 dollars to have my book edited and people are still finding mistakes!"


I've seen some of these threads. In all the ones I have seen, however, the issue is NOT bad grammar or typos. The issue is the writer is a bad writer and can't tell a story.

I know Brian started this thread in jest, but there is a reality some folks don't want to acknowledge. "Needs an editor" is a default comment by readers who can't articulate the subtle nuances that are missing. They know SOMETHING is wrong, but can't put their fingers on it. They don't know how to articulate things like theme and mood and worldbuilding and characterization and plot development and pacing and narrative voice.

It's like when I look at a painting. I can give a knee jerk reaction that I either like it or I don't. But because I'm not an artist, I can't articulate the in "artist-speak" why something doesn't work. Whereas another artist can point out form issues in a way another artist would understand. I can say "I don't like the colors" but I can't articulate why those colors don't work together in any meaningful way. We have a design department here where I work, and I listen to the designers talk to each other as to how to fix issues with structural designs and they just as well be speaking a foreign language.

So I do think we need to acknowledge that the "needs an editor" comment may not actually be about typos or grammar. It may just be bad writing. The ability to upload a document to Amazon does not automatically make one a good writer, despite whatever some may say.

As a publisher, I have read hundreds of stories that are relatively "error-free" but still suck. The writer just has no idea how to create a character that is not one-dimensional. Or doesn't understand that he is telling the story on "fast-forward" and needs to pace the action better. Or that the internal logic of the plot is failing beyond repair.

I still remember to this day the creative writing professor who said point blank "I can teach you how to write properly. I can't teach you how to write well." There is a fundamental difference between correct writing and good writing. It is a point I often make when someone says "well, so-and-so author did this in his book, so why can't I do it in mine?" The answer is simple. That author got away with it because he or she was a good writer. If you aren't a good writer, then no you CAN'T get away with those things.

Amanda Hockings is a great example. She has always been the first one to admit she needed editing and that her books had typos and grammar issues. But, Amanda is a natural storyteller. She can "get away" with certain errors because she can tell a story. I've heard people (not hear, but elsewhere in interwebzland) make snide comments along the lines of "how did she sell so many books when her books have so many errors. My book doesn't have any errors!" The difference is simply that her storytelling ability is strong enough to carry the book.

It's like cooking. Some people can follow a recipe to the letter and the end result is still tasteless. Others don't use a recipe at all and have never measured anything a day in their lives (like my mom, who does not even own measuring cups) but still cook great food. At the end of the day you either have the talent or you don't, and all the editing in the world can't change that.


----------



## AshMP (Dec 30, 2009)

I have to agree with Julie on this one.

I've yet to read a single novel that is 100% error free, trade and indie.  I just finished Nicholas Sparks THE LUCKY ONE ... and yes, there were errors and misspelt words.  But, I liked the story and it wasn't overly distracting.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I still remember to this day the creative writing professor who said point blank *"I can teach you how to write properly. I **can't teach you how to write well."* There is a fundamental difference between correct writing and good writing. It is a point I often make when someone says "well, so-and-so author did this in his book, so why can't I do it in mine?" The answer is simple. That author got away with it because he or she was a good writer. If you aren't a good writer, then no you CAN'T get away with those things.
> 
> Amanda Hockings is a great example. She has always been the first one to admit she needed editing and that her books had typos and grammar issues. But, Amanda is a natural storyteller. She can "get away" with certain errors because she can tell a story. I've heard people (not hear, but elsewhere in interwebzland) make snide comments along the lines of "how did she sell so many books when her books have so many errors. My book doesn't have any errors!" The difference is simply that her storytelling ability is strong enough to carry the book.


A couple years ago I read two books by two famous authors who I had read before. Unfortunately the plots, characters and overall stories were not as good as previous books I had read. There were real problems and I knew it as I read the whole book.

It showed me how a really skilled writer can take a not-so-good story and keep me interested. What really kept me interested was how they told the story and in the hands of a less skilled writer the books would not have been so well written. It was all in the storytelling, not the story.

ps: I never expect to read an error free story.


----------



## Kent Kelly (Feb 12, 2011)

I edit my own works.  That results in reviews ranging from 5 stars for my Alice (“one of the best-edited books on the Kindle”), to 3 stars for my Necronomicon (“loved the writing style but the editing was poor”).  I’m apparently not consistent but I’m incremental, fixing my books along the way.  

I tend not to mention this because I know I’ll get beat up for it and not receive constructive criticism.  And it’s just a financial reality.  If someone wants to accompany me when I walk up to my wife and say “Hey honey, I know we barely made the mortgage this month, the baby is sick, the student loans are insurmountable and we still owe the anesthesiologist $25,000, but my Kindle peers say I need to spend $600-$2,000 per book on editing, even the ones that haven’t cleared $300 in royalties,” you’re welcome to come over and see how that works out. 

Then again I buy Dune and Dark Tower books all the time that have poor editing as well.  And I see other authors’ stuff like Alice in Deadland making bank, despite the atrocious edit.  I don’t mind receiving fair reviews from readers saying the editing needs to be better; I then go give that book two more passes (~12 hours) and republish them.  And in the minority, I actually LIKE to receive reviews that are based on editing – not of the “couldn’t finish it” variety, but rather the “but it had some typos” variety … because I think that says to the reader that the worst thing the reviewer could find with the story was the typesetting, which obliquely speaks to the quality of the tale.

I do the “please proofread this for me and I’ll buy you a pizza” deal with friends, but TBQH they put in just as many errors as they find unless I give them a hardcopy to mark up, and then for some reason they do a worse job and take longer.

But I do think there’s a serious niche for affordable editing services.  And unlike reviews, it’s work that everyone expects to pay for and not get for free.


----------



## PAWilson (Jan 9, 2012)

You know if editing was affordable, maybe I'd pay for it. But, then again, maybe if the traditionally published books which are edited had no errors, I'd see the value. 

I get critiques and proofreading, but not editing.


----------



## SentientSurfer (Sep 20, 2011)

Kent Kelly said:


> I edit my own works.


Heretic! Heretic!

Run him out of Kindle Boards upon an iron rail!

In all seriousness, from one Cthulhuian to another, all I have to say is:

"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"

Or something very much like that.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Tinker said:


> You forgot to create a new genre: howabout "Organic Writing"? No added editing. Nothing but the finest manure.


It's been done...


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

Kent Kelly said:


> But I do think there's a serious niche for affordable editing services. And unlike reviews, it's work that everyone expects to pay for and not get for free.


I guess it depends on your definition of 'affordable'; just reading through a novel takes several hours, so if you charge $30 an hour that's already getting on for $300... before you actually suggest any edits.

I think the only way to offer editing that anyone can afford is to automate most of it, but then anyone can use the same software and they don't need the editor anymore. The software which does exist already does a reasonable job of basic editing (flagging cliches, grammar errors, misused words etc), but won't help much if you need major changes to the story.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Briteka said:


> I'm all for paying for copy editing, but I'm sort of against paying for content editing.


I kinda get this. (Julie, don't shoot me.) For fiction, at least. Seems to me that a professional storyteller should be able to tell a story without plot holes or major inconsistencies. Having a copy-editor or your librarian aunt clean it up is most likely a requirement, but if the story_ itself _needs major revision even after you've looked it over and had a beta reader or two, then maybe storytelling is not for you.


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2012)

PAWilson said:


> You know if editing was affordable, maybe I'd pay for it. But, then again, maybe if the traditionally published books which are edited had no errors, I'd see the value.


If some books were edited, maybe I'd be willing pay to read them.

Hiding behind the "maybe if the traditionally published books which are edited had no errors, I'd see the value" is the same thing as a six year old saying "But Billy's mom let's HIM do it." It doesn't fly when kids use the excuse. It sure doesn't fly when adults use it.

The poor behavior of one person never justifies the poor behavior of another. We need to stop pretending that it does.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

BrianKittrell said:


> I've seen far too many of the pro-editing threads lately. Where are the people who are strictly anti-editing? The 100% DIY'ers?
> 
> Seems the board shifts back and forth every couple of days, or maybe the anti-editing folks are on a hiatus.


I'm not anti-editing.

I am considering starting an anti-Kittrel blog, though...

Which just goes to prove my old theory...

GERMANS LOVE DAVID HASSELHOFF


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2012)

Susan in VA said:


> I kinda get this. (*****, don't shoot me.) For fiction, at least. Seems to me that a *professional storyteller * should be able to tell a story without plot holes or major inconsistencies. Having a copy-editor or your librarian aunt clean it up is most likely a requirement, but if the story_ itself _needs major revision even after you've looked it over and had a beta reader or two, then maybe storytelling is not for you.


I don't shoot. I use my lightsaber. 

Note the section I bolded in your quote. If someone has honed their craft over the years to the point that they no longer need help with CONTENT, that is fine. But far too many indies haven't spent the time to hone their craft. They upload a book and then curl into a ball and cry (or post angry threads on KB complaining about reviews!) if someone says something "mean" about the book. Too many people already think they have "arrived" and know everything, and if the reader doesn't "get it" or recognize that "I am trying to be ME!" or whatever then it is the reader's fault.

I don't usually use a content editor. I use line editors and proofreaders. But I don't always use a content editor. What I do is after I finish a book, I file it away for three or four months and then come back to it. Putting that distance between me and the book allows me to see with my "editor" eyes instead of my "writer" eyes. How many indies can resist the urge to upload a book for three months in order to put that distance between them and the story? But I have also been publishing professionally since I was 18. "Professionally" as in "People pay me for my work." I have worked with editors and know what they look for. I bothered to LEARN how editors think and realize it is more than checking for typos. I have made the point to master my craft and listen to people who offer me advice. If I don't employ a piece of advice, I can articulate why I felt the advice didn't work and don't resort to name-calling and accusing the person of trying to stifle my creativity.

At the end of the day, if you are writing FOR THE READER you are less likely to need a content editor than those who WRITE FOR THEMSELVES. Because if you write for the reader, you will view your story in terms of how the reader will read it. Itf you only write for yourself, you'll never hone your craft to a point where you can effectively self-edit for content.


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

Coming back on a serious note, I tried paying someone to edit my book. It ended up horrible. In the meantime, I edited my own novellas. Used to do editing work and did get a degree in it so might as well use that wall decoration. It came out better in my and readers opinions. Now I self-edit my stuff. Takes a long time but I found I really enjoy butchering my work. It borders on sick. Deleting chapters, noticing glaring plot holes, all that good stuff. However, it has ruined me on reading other books whether indie or trad. I can spot the places where the writing could be tighter and I have to stop. I recently tried reading Witch and Wizard by Patterson and could not make it pass the first chapter. My works might not be perfect but then again no one else can lay claim to that either. As for storytelling, that is a completely different thing in my opinion. You either have it or you do not.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> If someone has honed their craft over the years to the point that they no longer need help with CONTENT, that is fine. But far too many indies haven't spent the time to hone their craft.


And if the latter then act as though they were the former, that, to me, is unprofessional.



Danielle Kazemi said:


> As for storytelling, that is a completely different thing in my opinion. You either have it or you do not.


So true. And there are probably a lot of good storytellers whose talents are not appreciated because they lack the skills to showcase those talents.


----------



## Lee Lopez (Jan 19, 2012)

I'm both for and against using a 'editor'. I have a editor, but she's not a professional editor. But has a strong English background and is published. Professional editors are very expensive and I find untrustworthy in my opinion. I also rely on a circle of beta readers or proofreaders, they are my strongest editing point. They fine tune the story.


----------



## Benjamin A. (Oct 1, 2011)

Different people have different skills. As Julie pointed out, you can write mostly error free content without knowing how to tell a story and vice versa. I think how much help each author needs is going to change between each author. Traditional publishing causes most of us to think the methods employed by them are the only answer. You need a team of people behind you to create a good work, and that can certainly be true. There's nothing wrong with employing the aid of a professional to make any part of a book better, and if you can it's highly advisable. For indies, we have to hit every aspect of the market. You may not need help with everything, but identifying what you do need help with will increase chances of success.

Some people have not only a knack for creating the story, but the mechanical process of putting it down, and checking it later. Author A may churn out manuscripts that have 70% less errors than Author B before editing even takes place. Author A may read back over his manuscript, and close the plot holes Author B missed. Author A may be better at spotting there/their/they're and other content mistakes than author B. So by the end, their manuscripts that are ready for editing are already a world apart.

I'm the type who believes everything in this world comes down to situation and/or individual. We like to throw blanket statements around because it's easier to fit everything under one idea. If we could transform skills into numbers, and Author A is very high in sentence construction, grammar, pace, plot consistency and other important parts of writing a book, while author B scores average or lower in certain categories, it's safe to say Author A has a much better chance of putting out a work that will please without editing than author B. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. It means they have different skill sets in different areas. Authors B's story may be 10 times better when you actually read it, it just needed more help than Author A's manuscript. Author B may market circles around Author A. Author B may also possess design skills to make a cover, or be better at formatting the books than Author A. It's all about identifying weaknesses, and compensating accordingly.

I think you just really have to ask yourself, where are my strengths? Do I have good composition skills? Was I always writing near perfect papers back in school? Or did the teacher/professor hand back those papers with more red ink than black? When people other than the author read it (I do think this is important, even if it's not a professional) was each person finding errors all over the place? Or just a few throughout? Were those errors typos, proofing errors, or errors with the story itself? Story telling and writing are two very different things, and they don't come together in the same package. You can make a living off writing without telling stories. You can even make a living telling stories without writing. If you have both, you're set. If you've got one, you can compensate for the other with help from a variety of sources, from books to professionals. If you have neither... Well, I'd like to think everyone who wants to write books has at least one or the other, otherwise I'm not sure why you'd be drawn to writing books...


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Something must be working. Based on the Amazon best-seller lists, independent sales continue to increase.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Lexi Revellian said:


> (Who may, or may not, do her own proofreading and editing. I'm admitting nothing.)


Other than in the other currently active thread where you confess all.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I am not anti-editing, I am just not making enough money at my day job or via my books to afford to pay a professional editor.  So, I have to do it myself (which I loathe beyond all reason) or ask my fiancee or a friend to help - for free.  And they do, but things still get missed.  On my most recent novel, The Dead Phone, my fiancee and I read and re-read and edited the book four times...and still we get complaints about things that were missed.  The problem I have is that once you start re-reading a book that has been in my head for as long as 10 years (in the case of at least one novel), I fall into a kind of fugue state where words just blur together.  I may have meant to write "They ran toward..." and instead wrote "The ran toward..." but my eyes just skim past that and it reads right to me...only later when a reader points it out do I realize a mistake was missed.


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

balaspa said:


> I may have meant to write "They ran toward..." and instead wrote "The ran toward..." but my eyes just skim past that and it reads right to me...only later when a reader points it out do I realize a mistake was missed.


This is why you should load it into your Kindle and turn on text-to-speech, rather than read the words.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Edward M. Grant said:


> This is why you should load it into your Kindle and turn on text-to-speech, rather than read the words.


Far be it from me to encourage peeps not to hire professionals, but this is good advice. It really does help.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

On a slight tangent:

Some readers will PM authors and point out typos or other minor (as in, easily fixable) errors in a published book.  (Assume for a moment that those readers found actual mistakes and not regionalisms.)  How likely are you to fix the errors and re-publish the revised version?  I honestly have no idea how much of a hassle it is to do that.  Would you do it for, say, five typos in a book?  Twenty?  Where's the point at which you'd consider it worth your time?   And how often would you do that, if subsequent readers found more?   

I'd like to think that the answers to these questions would indicate who is really anti-editing.  But that wouldn't be a fair judgement without knowing how complicated/difficult/costly it might be to revise and republish.  I have some idea of the cost involved in producing printed work, but I've never worked in e-book publishing.  Can someone enlighten me?


----------



## SentientSurfer (Sep 20, 2011)

Susan in VA said:


> I have some idea of the cost involved in producing printed work, but I've never worked in e-book publishing. Can someone enlighten me?


If you still have the file you used to originally publish the ebook, you could correct the errors in minutes and re-upload the document. It would take very little time. Assuming the errors are easily fixable. Amazon would update the book within 24hours.


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

For one error I would reupload. It costs nothing to fix the mistakes but costs readers if I choose not to. The only hassle, in my opinion, is alerting the people who bought an older version.


----------



## Benjamin A. (Oct 1, 2011)

Susan in VA said:


> On a slight tangent:
> 
> Some readers will PM authors and point out typos or other minor (as in, easily fixable) errors in a published book. (Assume for a moment that those readers found actual mistakes and not regionalisms.) How likely are you to fix the errors and re-publish the revised version? I honestly have no idea how much of a hassle it is to do that. Would you do it for, say, five typos in a book? Twenty? Where's the point at which you'd consider it worth your time? And how often would you do that, if subsequent readers found more?
> 
> I'd like to think that the answers to these questions would indicate who is really anti-editing. But that wouldn't be a fair judgement without knowing how complicated/difficult/costly it might be to revise and republish. I have some idea of the cost involved in producing printed work, but I've never worked in e-book publishing. Can someone enlighten me?


Very easy on ebooks. Just change the error in the file and re-upload. I would absolutely fix them if they were pointed out. I've made revisions after publishing, it's quite normal. I haven't experienced having readers message me to point out errors yet, but if a reader took the time to contact me and point out a typo, I'd go fix it even if it was a single one (assuming it really is a typo, and not a misinformed reader).

Edited to add: Ignoring errors that have been pointed out isn't anti-editing, it's just being foolish. If it's a true error, there's no debate like there may be over content. *Their isn't any way to get home now.* That is an error that is wrong no matter what kind of editing you believe in. If you wouldn't change that because you didn't believe in editing, then you have a much bigger problem.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I use line editors and proofreaders. But I don't always use a content editor. What I do is after I finish a book, I file it away for three or four months and then come back to it. Putting that distance between me and the book allows me to see with my "editor" eyes instead of my "writer" eyes. How many indies can resist the urge to upload a book for three months in order to put that distance between them and the story? But I have also been publishing professionally since I was 18. "Professionally" as in "People pay me for my work." I have worked with editors and know what they look for. I bothered to LEARN how editors think and realize it is more than checking for typos. I have made the point to master my craft and listen to people who offer me advice. If I don't employ a piece of advice, I can articulate why I felt the advice didn't work and don't resort to name-calling and accusing the person of trying to stifle my creativity.


*nod*

I've been doing this long enough that I know what my weaknesses are. I can usually pull out the trouble scenes and run them by beta readers with nothing more than the context of the story. Then, I can hire a proofreader (Faith at HaveFaithProofreading.com). Some of my stuff has been previously published, so I don't need to do anything. Sometimes, I don't have a beta reader available or I can't return the favour, so I do pay someone to content edit for me then.

And I'm patient. I don't need to upload a story today. I had a short story sit on my hard drive for a couple of months because I knew there was something wrong with it, but I wasn't sure what it was. It came to me.

People are all about gold rush and the Get Rich Quick scheme of it all. But, there's also skill involved. Patience is a virtue at times. Learning one's craft and taking time to learn your mistakes and weaknesses, and how to fix them, is worth the time.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Thanks, Surfer, Danielle, Benjamin.  As far as alerting the readers who bought an older version  --  I assume the only thing you can do there is ask Amazon to handle it, and maybe also post somewhere that you've updated it?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "I'd like to think that the answers to these questions would indicate who is really anti-editing. But that wouldn't be a fair judgement without knowing how complicated/difficult/costly it might be to revise and republish. I have some idea of the cost involved in producing printed work, but I've never worked in e-book publishing. Can someone enlighten me?"


The easiest method is to edit the actual file that was uploaded. Then upload again. Very simple. No cost other than a few minutes time.

This may result in the upload file being different from the Word file. This would happen if one wrote in Word, then produced an upload file with Mobi. So the Word file would then be changed for consistency.

Alternatively, one could fix the Word file, run it through Mobi again, then upload the Mobi output. That guarantees consistency.

Since there are lots of paths people take from source document to upload file, the full change would also take different paths.

Each time we mess with a file, there is a chance of making some inadvertent mistake, so it's reasonable to have a system for managing changes. That may entail fixing each one as soon as possible, or batching and making periodic changes. I don't think the system chosen is a good indicator of anti-editing attitudes.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Each time we mess with a file, there is a chance of making some inadvertent mistake, so it's reasonable to have a system for managing changes. That may entail fixing each one as soon as possible, or batching and making periodic changes. I don't think the system chosen is a good indicator of anti-editing attitudes.


Makes perfect sense. I was just trying to get a feel for how realistic it was to expect changes to be made at all.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Susan in VA said:


> On a slight tangent:
> 
> Some readers will PM authors and point out typos or other minor (as in, easily fixable) errors in a published book. (Assume for a moment that those readers found actual mistakes and not regionalisms.) How likely are you to fix the errors and re-publish the revised version? I honestly have no idea how much of a hassle it is to do that. Would you do it for, say, five typos in a book? Twenty? Where's the point at which you'd consider it worth your time? And how often would you do that, if subsequent readers found more?
> 
> I'd like to think that the answers to these questions would indicate who is really anti-editing. But that wouldn't be a fair judgement without knowing how complicated/difficult/costly it might be to revise and republish. I have some idea of the cost involved in producing printed work, but I've never worked in e-book publishing. Can someone enlighten me?


I reissued all my earlier Kindle published books and used the following guideline.

1- There was a style inconstancy that bothered me more than the reader. (This happens when one continually grows in ones authorial arc).

2 - Feedback on typos or malapropisms from readers accumulate to where the work is less than 95% strack.

3 - An opportunity prevails to reissue the books (in my case an omnibus of three of the books, inspiring some rewrites and even an expansion).

4 - When the work is popular and you get, _wonderful, but the typos and omissions irked me _ comments.

On the whole, one learns and grows and reissuing a book shouldn't be necessary with 99% strack threshold as a proofing requirement. Feedback on grammar is a style issue and style issues when a book sells well and is reviewed well should be regarded as the reader's problem and should not require a general reissue.

When reissuing a book, the only announcement should be REVISED and a date, and, if you have a facility like Smashwords, an offer to replace copies for free for a 2 week period.

There should be no excuse for an author who works basically as a one person operation (plus at least one outside editor) to regard that as a handicap. The work should strive to the quality of reader's expectations. The reader should not realize that you do not have an office staff of twenty and a battery of expensive traditional tools. Authors are artists and publishers are craftsmen. When reduced to a cottage industry, reader enjoyment is the last thing sacrificed, not the first.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Edward C. Patterson said:


> Feedback on grammar is a style issue


An interesting concept.........


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

Susan in VA said:


> An interesting concept.........


But perfectly true. Imagine the feedback James Joyce would receive from an editor if he submitted Finnegan's Wake when he was an unknown writer.

Which is not to imply that writers should ignore the rules of grammar, but there are plenty of successful novels which create their own style that works for the readers.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Which begs the question of why Finnegan's Wake ever became a successful novel...


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2012)

Susan in VA said:


> How likely are you to fix the errors and re-publish the revised version? I honestly have no idea how much of a hassle it is to do that. Would you do it for, say, five typos in a book? Twenty? Where's the point at which you'd consider it worth your time? And how often would you do that, if subsequent readers found more?


For a single error found by a single reader? No, I'm not going through the process of a revision. That is a quick way to make yourself crazy. If you keep revisiting the past, you never move forward. If you have one book and you only sell it on Amazon, maybe this is no big deal. I have hundreds of digital products sold all over the place. Particularly because I have print versions of my books, and revising a print product is much more time consuming and expensive than uploading a new Kindle file.

Now that said, when I started working with Andy on the audiobook for _A Game of Blood,_ I decided to do a revision. I did go through the book and "clean up" a couple of things I noticed. I also got new cover art (thank you, John Ward ). But it makes sense to make those corrections now because I'm preparing for a new marketing push when the audiobook comes out.

But as much as I am "pro"-editing, it is possible to hyperedit to the point that you miss the point. We get so fixated on being "correct" and "perfect" that we forget what it is we are supposed to be doing.

I work for a huge corporation. I got this email from our accounting department this morning asking me if an order could be received into the system. Our SOPs are such that no invoice is supposed to be paid until the purchase order has been received in full into inventory.

I went and pulled up the PO in our system, and the PO was created by someone in another facility. And it was an item we don't use here. So I emailed accounting back and said that we didn't cut the PO and that we don't use this item.

She responded back that she talked to the person who cut the PO and the item WAS delivered to us. He had entered the wrong location code when cutting the PO, and the item got sent to us instead of the other plant. He had already sent an email to the warehouse to ship the item to him.

She then said that we needed to receive the PO in our system so that the invoice could be paid. According to our "correct" SOPs, so long as the PO and the invoice match (PO number, item, quantity, etc) and it is received in the system, the invoice gets paid.

I informed her, however, that I wasn't going to receive the PO because, if the invoice was paid AS IS, our facility would be charged instead of the correct facility. I recommended that the PO simply be updated to reflect the correct location and then they could receive it in their system when we shipped it to them. That way the correct plant would be charged.

"But then the ship-to location on the invoice won't match the PO," was the reply I got.

She was so concerned with having the SOP followed PERFECTLY that she was throwing common sense out the window. I actually had to get one of my managers involved to get it resolved so that we didn't end up getting charged.

It's the same thing with typos. You can worry about what will happen if someone finds one and make yourself nuts. OR, you can apply some common sense and just engage in good storytelling so that readers don't even notice.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Something must be working. Based on the Amazon best-seller lists, independent sales continue to increase.


Yep. In spite of all the ranting about how it's all just bunch of losers in a cult. 

Revising after publication? It's not that hard. I do it if I know there are more than say a half-dozen errors. But frankly about 75% of time people complain about "typos" in my novels, it's dialect. I've never published a novel that wasn't edited by someone who is a professional editor.

I *think* I know my own strengths and weaknesses as a writer and what to watch for as far as content editing, but then that's easy to say, isn't it? Knowing what my weaknesses are and identifying them and fixing them are two very different things.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> But frankly about 75% of time people complain about "typos" in my novels, it's dialect.


Yup. Or sometimes style. Dialogue is tough, too, because it could just be the way the person speaks.

And Toque is not a typo people


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I don't know why, but this reminds me of the Ravenloft vampires that all have those weird weaknesses. Like the gnomish vampires that could be tricked to stop chasing you by throwing something shiny at them. They would have to make a Will Save or stop chasing their prey and pick up the shiny to admire it.
> 
> I just imagine a vampire version of Betsy being repelled by colorful squares of fabric.
> 
> Sorry, my geekness is showing.


lol Yes, I thought about adding, "as you might place a bag of grain by your door to distract vampires." Didn't know if anyone would get it, though. Well, I take that back. We do have a number of vampire writers who do research that deep.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I'm not anti-editing.
> 
> I am considering starting an anti-Kittrel blog, though...
> 
> ...


LOL They always say, there's no such thing as bad publicity.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Edward M. Grant said:


> But perfectly true. Imagine the feedback James Joyce would receive from an editor if he submitted Finnegan's Wake when he was an unknown writer.
> 
> Which is not to imply that writers should ignore the rules of grammar, but there are plenty of successful novels which create their own style that works for the readers.


I understand this. If I was an established writer, I'd go all Cormac McCarthy and remove commas unless they were needed for understanding. Some people write with a perfect cadence and flow that is hurt by commas, and don't even get me started about comma splices and the semicolon. Perhaps I'm just a pessimist, but I totally believe that the average reader has no idea what a semicolon is, and when they read it, it completely removes them from the flow of the story. That being said, I still follow the rules of grammar. I still connect comma splices with a semicolon (sometimes rewriting totally removes the flow of the writing). If any of us tried to write in a stylistic manner, we'd be crucified. McCarthy found an editor that "got him" at the beginning of his career. And still, he's not a big seller. Most people know him for The Road, and they think he wrote the way he did in that novel because it "fit the theme." They'll be surprised if they pick up a second book and find that that is his actual style.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Yup. Or sometimes style. Dialogue is tough, too, because it could just be the way the person speaks.
> 
> And Toque is not a typo people


Ha. Neither is Outwith.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

D. Nathan Hilliard said:


> Define "anti-editing". I don't use a professional editor, but I do use an entire circle of proofreaders who I value so much that I dedicate my books to them on the dedication page.


This is me. My mother, my wife, and a friend of mine all read and give feedback. I do a dozen or so revisions and read-throughs until I'm satisfied. More of a team-based DIY'er.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Add me to the list of people who've never seen a group of "anti-editing" people on these boards. I've seen writers who claimed they don't have enough money to pay for an editor and that they wished they weren't treated as second class citizens on the boards, but I've yet to see a thread where someone literally took a serious position that you should never hire an editor of any type even if you can afford it. There's just a lot of writers who just so happen to be poor who generally seem worried that others of us who are paying for editors will not include them in the indie author category because many of us seem like pretentious jerks with our frequent editing rants.

Paying hundreds to thousands for editing doesn't guarantee sales, and there have been dozens if not hundreds of authors who didn't use an editor of any type and who've made it into the top 1,000 paid list and stayed there for significant periods of time. There have been equal amounts of authors who have purchased editing services that were insufficient at catching major errors, and many of those have never made it to the top 1,000 paid list. I've paid thousands on editing and cover art, but it doesn't guarantee me anything--the least of which would be sales or 100% satisfied readers.

I have enjoyed the process of working with an editor, and despite my limited budget, I will continue to do so as much as I can. But I do so because I don't have kids (yet), I have a fantastic wife who supports my decision to pay thousands out of my savings for editing and cover art, I should have a great job within the next few months, and I hope to continue to be able to afford the luxury of working with quality editors and cover artists. Not everyone is so fortunate, and I don't try to slap labels onto them or make their lives any more difficult simply because I pay more than they do to publish.

To those readers who come into this thread and voice their concerns over indie publishing quality, I'm sorry you feel that way. No one should pay for something they feel is not worth their time, but I also feel that no one should have their dreams dashed simply because they're poor. Critique groups are a crap shoot and most will do more harm than good (let's face it, for a critique group to be useful, you have to have experienced, good writers in them and that can't be the case with the majority of these groups--which are everywhere these days). Community college writing courses? Again, out of the price range of many of these authors (and actually more expensive than a content editor in many cases due to rising tuition costs). Posting a notice for an English major to critique your work? Completely random results and may make things better or worse. Legacy publishing, if you can get into the door with them, is more likely to exploit a low to mid tier author than promote them and see them successful.

So, out of the options available to authors, none of them are good for the majority of authors out there. They're forced to sit in front of a KDP or Smashwords interface with their pointer hovering over the "Publish" button, anxiously deciding whether or not they should commit to pursuing their life's goal of becoming self-sufficient doing something they enjoy or wasting away in obscurity in publishing house slush piles. Should one of their reasons for anxiety really be that they're worried that they'll be labeled "anti-editing" or a lesser grade self-publisher by people here on KB? We've lost a lot of contributing authors in the Writer's Cafe because of this attitude. Most of these "anti-editing" authors choose to hang out in the Indie Writer's Unite group on Facebook instead because they're quite frankly sick of the attitudes of the more entitled and vocal authors here who can pay hundreds to thousands for editing/cover art services. I know what you're thinking: "Good riddance", right? "We don't need you non-editing authors souring our good names by making us look bad!"

Well, if you guys push out more authors like Hugh Howey, who recently asked "How much does it cost to have a 100,000 word book proofread and edited?", despite his amazing success with the Wool series, I'll definitely stop coming around here too. I know, "Good riddance", right? Well, just remember where your attitudes are getting you when you make another thread wondering where the people who disagreed with you in the past went to.

P.S. Just saw Hugh post during my rant-post. STAY HERE, HUGH .


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Actually, there are a few people who insist that if you pay someone to do work for you that you aren't really indie. You'll find them in the "100% indie" thread, I think. They conflate DIY with indie. My feeling is that is like saying I'm not really a homeowner if I pay someone to mow the grass. I'm not sure whether they also say you can't use a beta reader and still be indie because it's not an attitude I find worth reading a thread about. (No insult intended. I just don't agree but don't really care to argue the point)

I do think there are ways around paying a lot of money for publishing. Can't afford a cover? Download GIMP and spend a lot of time learning to use it. Can't afford an editor? Have several people who are good with grammar and spelling at least proof it for you. Print it out in a different font and read it out loud. That doesn't do content editing, but frankly I only trust professionals with content editing. 

But I assure you there ARE no novels that don't have a few errors, so I don't get excited when someone tells me they found one or two errors. I'll mark them down for possible correction, but I'm not running in a panic.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Actually, there are a few people who insist that if you pay someone to do work for you that you aren't really indie. You'll find them in the "100% indie" thread, I think. They conflate DIY with indie. I'm not sure whether they also say you can't use a beta reader and still be indie because it's not an attitude I find worth reading a thread about.


How about "no"?

The thread is about Ellen Fisher getting back the rights to her books from Samhain, so that she is no longer using legacy publishers and is "100% indie." So, you're basically not reading a thread because of a false impression you have that has no basis in reality. The majority of the thread is filled with comments about chest-waxing nerds in her covers. Nice try, though.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> How about "no"?
> 
> The thread is about Ellen Fisher getting back the rights to her books from Samhain, so that she is no longer using legacy publishers and is "100% indie." So, you're basically not reading a thread because of a false impression you have that has no basis in reality. The majority of the thread is filled with comments about chest-waxing nerds in her covers. Nice try, though.


You seem to miss the words "I think". Nice courtesy, though.

Thanks for the information, however, there is such a thread. I don't recall the subject.

I'm not "avoiding" the thread. I don't bother to read 90% of the threads on this forum largely from disinterest in the topic. I have equal disinterest in "chest-waxing nerds" as I do in the insistence one must be DIY.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> You seem to miss the words "I think". Nice courtesy, though.
> 
> Thanks for the information, however, there is such a thread. I don't recall the subject.
> 
> I'm not "avoiding" the thread. I don't bother to read 90% of the threads on this forum largely from disinterest in the topic. I have equal disinterest in "chest-waxing nerds" as I do in the insistence one must be DIY.


I'm pretty sure you and the OP are conflating posters here. You're talking about a group of people who think that "pure indie" is someone who does everything themselves. Brian is talking about someone who believes that no one should pay for editing. The first is about labeling, sort of how Julie feels that people claiming to be "indie" is just ridiculous, since it has been used for "independent presses/publishing" for years. This group of "pure indie" people believes that if you want to be "pure indie", do everything yourself. Maybe they get a rush similar to rock climbing without a harness and anchors . The second one is a phantom type that apparently exists in a thread about chest-waxing nerds--sort of like a legendary chupacabra. Many in the thread claim to have seen one, but the camera is all blurry, or in our case the thread is really about chest-waxing nerds. But according to you, even if the thread was about chest-waxing nerds instead of chupacabra anti-editing DIYers, you're really annoyed that these "anti-editing" DIYers exist, and by God, you're not going to click on any of thread that might resemble it because your precious time should not be wasted on a humorous thread. Instead, your time is better used misleading others about where they can find evidence of those pesky anti-editing guys.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Each time we mess with a file, there is a chance of making some inadvertent mistake, so it's reasonable to have a system for managing changes. That may entail fixing each one as soon as possible, or batching and making periodic changes. I don't think the system chosen is a good indicator of anti-editing attitudes.


When I get a chance I'm starting a thread on this topic called "Artifacts in editing and Revisions and Revision ghosts," or something like that. This is an area I have studied and cover in my book on publishing (in the Revision sections). However, I believe this is an area that will enlighten both readers, and newbie indies and deserves a spotlight. Perhaps tomorrow.  I mean, like everything I bring forward, it's already written in my head.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Susan in VA said:


> An interesting concept.........


For an author who is grounded in the rules and who consciously breaks them for stylistic reasons (sound, sense, rhythm, pace etc.), when the feedback is - _Lots of grammatical errors_, _but an enjoyable read _ - it's not my issue. Grammar is employed for legibility and understanding. If legibility and understanding are much in evidence, but grammar's rules are broken, the issue exists with the reader who gives that sort of feedback and not with me, who did my job. Of course when there are tense errors, number and gender issues, and things that trip up legibility, then shame on me for throwing the reader off course. But grammar for the breathing author is a matter of style. In fact, there are some syntactical consistencies that an author should adopt when breaking grammatical rules. I, for example, always use "_then_" in the diploid construct . . . _He ate his tapioca, and then belched _ - to express sequenced actions. Grammar states the "then" is unnecessary. However, to me, without it there isn't a sequence of action, but someone throwing up or choking on their tapioca. In any event, regardless of other considerations, I insert on revision the "then" whenever I have a diploid sequence. In this way (given repetition), it fades into the background with the hordes of _saids _ in dialog tagging.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> For a single error found by a single reader? No, I'm not going through the process of a revision. That is a quick way to make yourself crazy. If you keep revisiting the past, you never move forward.


Yup. This is something a few of my readers have struggled with. Apparently, I have 2 typos in my trad book (an extra word, and a semi-colon instead of a comma). I've had three writer folks tell me how devastated I must be. Not really. I'm annoyed that the extra word is in the dedication to my step kids (who didn't notice the dedication...I didn't even notice it). But, seriously, it's out. There's nothing more I can do about it. And, frankly, that's liberating.

There comes a point that a story is done. A couple of typos is not worth revisiting a piece over and over (especially for someone like me who has a problem with using the wrong word i.e. who becomes how and my brain reads it as who). I'd need to have someone proof everything I did again.

Now, sure, if I had massive issues, that's totally different. Then again, I can't see myself putting that kind of work up for sale, either.

ETA: Also, often the minor things are just one person's opinion. I'm not changing the book for a comma. I'm also not going to rewrite huge sections because one reader thinks I use a certain word too many times. There comes a point when I'm just going to let it go.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Rex Jameson said:


> We've lost a lot of contributing authors in the Writer's Cafe because of this attitude. Most of these "anti-editing" authors choose to hang out in the Indie Writer's Unite group on Facebook instead because they're quite frankly sick of the attitudes of the more entitled and vocal authors here who can pay hundreds to thousands for editing/cover art services. I know what you're thinking: "Good riddance", right? "We don't need you non-editing authors souring our good names by making us look bad!"
> 
> Well, if you guys push out more authors like Hugh Howey, who recently asked "How much does it cost to have a 100,000 word book proofread and edited?", despite his amazing success with the Wool series, I'll definitely stop coming around here too. I know, "Good riddance", right? Well, just remember where your attitudes are getting you when you make another thread wondering where the people who disagreed with you in the past went to.


Well said.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

Deep breath. Okay, I'm going to do it. I'll be the sacrificial lamb. At this point in my career, I do not see myself paying money for an editor, even if I felt like I could afford one (which I'm beginning to believe will be never anyway, because there are always things I feel I *need* to do with my money, like pay off my car or save it for lean months when I'm having rankings slumps).

Am I insane? Probably. Okay, so I've been edited before (but I will admit that I was edited by editors for erotic romance, and I'm not trying to slam erotic romance in any way shape or form, but there was like...no content editing whatsoever, so...) and from this experience, and from the experience of having several damn fine beta readers, I've learned that my writing tends to have the following issues. I correct these issues and my writing becomes stronger. It's not perfect, but I don't believe that hiring an editor would make it perfect either.

Content issues:
-Within individual books, I make varied blunders, from pacing to character motivations to a lack of properly understanding the legal system (despite research). 
The fix: It varies. But generally: Isolate the problem. Find the places where things don't work. Change them.
-I tend to have characters ramble on about what they're going to do and then have them do something completely different. This is muse dump and usually happens when I don't write from an outline, and I'm freaking out about what will happen next.
The fix: Cut the rambles. Even better, notice it when drafting and stop doing it.
-I tend to summarize what went on in the last scene at the beginning of the next scene in an attempt to tie the scenes together. This happens when I write from an outline, because I'll usually just think up scenes out of order and then smash them together and while writing, they seem incoherent.
The fix: Cut the summaries. Better yet, stop doing that. Trust that the snappy switch from one scene to the next will keep readers engaged.

Proofreading issues:
-My biggest, HUGEST, issue is leaving out words in sentences. I'm way bad about this. It will never stop. It's cause I get really excited while I'm typing and I go fast.
The fix: Have the computer read the book aloud to me. I usually catch most of them. 
-I sometimes have brain farts and confuse homophones. 
The fix: Using a search and replace function, go through the manuscript and check and make sure they're actually right. (Or better yet, try to slow down and think about them and just use the right one.)

Style issues:
Here's where most of my biggies lie.
-Repeated words. I repeat words like crazy, sometimes using the same freaking word like five times in one paragraph. Sometimes I find a really nifty word like sling and I use it every page for ten pages.
The fix: When hearing it read aloud, these REALLY stick out. Change the words to different words.
-Just. I just really love just writing the word 'just' just all the time.
The fix: Search and replace just. Most of them can just be deleted from the manuscript because I'm using the word for unnecessary emphasis. Many others can be changed to "only" or "simply." And some can even stay, if I really like them.
-eyes/gaze
The fix: Search and replace. Eyes don't dart around the room. (But wouldn't it be cool if they did? I'd use mine as bouncy balls)
-like/as if/as though
The fix: Oh God, this one takes FOREVER. Search and replace like. Every like that introduces a clause and isn't used to introduce a simile goes.

While drafting:
-When a word is underlined in red, and I didn't make the word up for my fun new world, and it's not a name or other proper noun that's uncommon, figure out what it's supposed to be and change it. While drafting. (I get much better at spelling this way.)
-When I don't know a rule about grammar (i.e. lie vs. lay or who's vs. whose), I stop drafting and go and look it up. This is SOO annoying, that I usually only have to look it up twice before I remember it forever. 

I would mention that I'm a former English teacher, but honestly, most of what I've learned about the errors I make and the structure of English have happened because I decided to learn it. Usually, while drafting. Like, I learned that when two words describe a noun, you need to hyphenate them, but that if that same phrase appears after the verb, it's not hyphenated, even if it's a predicate adjective describing the noun. I learned that when I have a noun before a gerund, it's modifying it, and thus must be possessive, as in, "Your saying I don't need an editor may be true, but I'm simply too cheap." I learned TONS of things. 

I do use beta readers. But I find that many of them (even fellow authors) tend to not know what they're doing and point out things that they THINK are errors that aren't really errors. I like it when a beta finds a missing word or helps me with content, and they're helpful. But though I get people to look at my work, I really feel like I do the bulk of the heavy lifting with editing, most of the time. There are exceptions when I find rare gems of beta readers, who are fabulous. Usually, they start charging money. 

Now, I'm by no means saying my books are error free, cause they aren't. And as I've gotten better at writing, I've also gotten better at editing. Additionally, the better you write, the less you need to edit. My books have typos. They have problems. And I write in a very simplistic style which I like, because it's punchy, but other people might call juvenile. That's a choice, though, so I don't care what they think. (I <3 Kurt Vonnegut.) I've been studying my craft and studying the language I write in since I started writing stories (when I was five--like most of us, I assume), and I'm simply not convinced that the improvement that someone else could make on the books would be worth several thousand dollars. Or even $400. 

So. There you go. I'm steeling myself for the smack down. I'm not anti-editing, and someday when I'm really rich (like Joe Konrath rich), I'll probably pay for it. But it will probably mostly be because I'm lazy and don't feel like investing the time.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

August 14, 2011. Brian makes a post about quitting writing. He's decided that the pile of hate mail has become too much. His unedited zombie series is the bane of all existence, and he posts a simple, humble series of questions about what he should do next. Basically, the two posts read:

"How should I quit? 1) Release the 4th zombie book and include it on my website for readers who actually liked the series or 2) leave the series at 3 books on my website and simply stop writing?"

The result is a unilateral outpouring of support. People who will never post here anymore, many due to threads like this one mocking authors without editors, come out of the woodwork and lay down reality for Brian. He soaks in the words and hopes Lynn at Red Adept Editing will see promise in the fantasy novel he sent her. If she'll believe in his work, then he says he'll give writing another chance. She does, and his new books take off. He gets positive reinforcement from a reading community that he desperately craves, and his entire demeanor changes. Eight months later, he's mocking the kind of authors that he once was--the ones who couldn't afford an editor.

What's the moral of this story? I'm not sure there is one. It's just another story that continues to repeat itself here in the Writer's Cafe. You guys want these authors you consider beneath you here when you need them to congratulate you on your latest milestone, but you'd rather shame them into shutting up and going elsewhere if they're not going to pony up their rent money for an editor. You want them to share your outrage and feel as one with you when you disagree with one of the big guys like Amazon doing something you don't like, but you want them to know that they're not in your league of excellence when you have the receipt from your editor. And mentoring one of them or inviting them into your critique groups is so far out of the question as to be hilarious. It's too much work, and it doesn't feed your complex. It's much more productive to just use blanket statements that shame the larger group into not talking anymore.

Being a writer is hard enough without having a vocal minority of other writers putting their foot on your neck when you're down. Don't like the quality of other indie authors? Try mentoring some of them in your genre. Guide them on the path to becoming better writers. It takes about as much time as initiating and replying to yet another thread about indie authors who don't hire editors being beneath you because you take writing seriously and they don't.


----------



## Rykymus (Dec 3, 2011)

Some people need an editor. Some people don't. Some people can write beautiful prose in the first draft and they're done. Others have to work and slave, pouring over it numerous times to get it "right." It really doesn't matter whether you pay an editor, a proofreader, or offer to do the vacuuming (and laundry) for a month in exchange for your wife proofreading your work. All that matters is the end product. Anybody who honestly believes that someone's work is substandard simply because they didn't pay a so-called "professional" to look over their work is an idiot, and doesn't deserve to be debated with. IMHO. *runs for cover*

I DIY'd my first book cuz I didn't have the money. I used my first payment from Amazon to pay for proofreading. As long as I can afford it, I'll pay for it. Not because I think that it can't be DIY'd. But rather because I don't want to do it. It's boring, and I'm not very good at it.

I myself will forgive a new author for quite a few errors. If after they're making money if they're still putting out work with a lot of errors, that's a different story. But jeez, can you imagine the number of really great stories we'd all be missing if no one could publish without a "professional" editor?


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Nice posts, Rex. A bit adversarial--especially if we're all in this together--but well said.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

To give the perspective of somebody new to writing and publishing:

It's hard to know when your book is ready (or good enough) to publish.  Especially if you cannot afford professional editing.  Now I've seen some people here say - "It's a business, if you cant afford to pay for the basics to produce a good product, get out of the kitchen" or words to that effect.

Problem is that at the moment I cannot afford professional editing. As in - "dont have the money" cant afford, not "would rather spend it on a new phone" cant afford.  So I find ways to make my writing as good as possible within the means I have at the moment. Online critique groups, favors from friends etc.

Also while I think that as a writer I can benefit from working with a good editor, it is not clear to me that "not hiring a professional editor" = "poor quality book".  

This does not mean I have contempt for my (potential?) readers, or that I dont value my own work.  

Edit to add: OK that came out a bit more bad tempered than I meant it.  Got up too early this morning...


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> She does, and his new books take off. He gets positive reinforcement from a reading community that he desperately craves, and his entire demeanor changes. Eight months later, he's mocking the kind of authors that he once was--the ones who couldn't afford an editor.


I think you've missed the point entirely. I was never anti-editing. I couldn't afford it for my earlier stuff, so I did what I could: utilized as many volunteers as I could muster. It still ended up not being good enough to substitute for a paid editor. And don't get me wrong. The series had plenty of fans, and every day new people are reading them since I've made them free and have let me know that they enjoyed the stories.

Who am I talking about? The ones who simply don't care. It's not the ones who can't afford it (my heart's with them, and I hope things improve), but the ones who advocate not hiring editors and even go so far as to dissuade people from getting any outside help whatsoever. I made the post that I did because I didn't know if I had it left in me to go on with writing and publishing because I'd put so much energy into my early stuff that I couldn't imagine the amount I would need to put into my new stuff going forward. It turned out not to be nearly as bad as I had thought, and I've learned a great deal. It wasn't that I needed to work harder, it was that I needed some guidance in the right direction from someone who knew books and publishing. I needed to work on my weak spots that I (and my beta/editor volunteers) couldn't see.

I appreciate your trying to write an alternate history here and make the implication that I was ever against outside editing, but I've always been pro-editing-of-some-kind. I've always been one to say, "Don't go it alone. Hire someone if possible, but if you're broke, don't be the only one to have read the thing. Get SOMEONE to look at it." I still stand by that. I recommend getting a paid pro for a number of reasons, but if you can't yet, don't go it alone. Trade time/critiques with other authors. Critiquecircle.com. Whatever it takes to get another set of eyes on the thing.

Are there people who can self-edit to near perfection? Sure, but those who cannot far outnumber them. Who was this post directed at? The ones who write it, accept no criticism or critique (because they're an artiste' or some such), and then run around saying, "Oh, you need no help! They shall interfere with your vision!" We haven't seen them in a while, so I was beginning to wonder where they'd gone, especially with all the pro-editing threads of late. Weeks ago, pro-editing threads would have had a mixture of both factions, and it would normally be locked within a few hours.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

I've also decided this:

I'm going to ALSO start a pro-Kittrel blog.

And then I'm going to have the anti-Kittrel blog declare war on the pro-Kittrel blog.

A big, messy war. With pomegranates.


----------



## KC75 (Jun 24, 2011)

A so-called professional would at least know words that follow "so-called" should not be enclosed in quotation marks. 

As an editor, I get a bit tired of people suggesting that editing is not a profession, or that anyone who can read can do it themselves. It would be like me suggesting that carpentry is not a trade, all you need is a hammer. Editors spend years acquiring knowledge about the English language and about style, usage, and voice. among other things. I have spent almost half my life working in publishing houses, but apparently Joe Blow with a high school education and a red pen is just good. 

I know some indies cannot afford editors; while I think that is a shame, I accept it. But I will not accept that my nearly fifteen years of experience count for nothing.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Valerie,
No snark intended, you sound very diligent.  My thought isn't _OMG, she needs an editor_ - it's more, _wow, she probably could use the vacation._ Seriously, you sound like the ideal person to not have an editor -- one who knows her own issues and works to fix them.

I'm a word repeater, too. That's why I really notice it when other people do it. Even when posting to boards, I abuse "I think." My brain thinks that if a word is good enough to use once, I might as well keep using it.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2012)

I have never ONCE said anyone must PAY for editing if they can't afford it.  On several occassions, both here on KB and on my own site, I have offered suggestions on how to get editorial help on a shoestring budget.  You can recruit on college campuses.  You can trade services with other creative peeple (ex: I'll design your book cover if you edit my book).  There is nothing wrong with using the resources around you to get the help you need.

My problem is with people who think they are "too good" for editing of any kind.  The people who think a content editor will destroy their work. The people who think spelling is "voluntary" and grammar is no big deal.  The people who, when you tell them the narrative voice is flat or the pacing of a story is too fast, get bent out of shape and accuse you of being mean.  The people who think "being supportive" means "never say ANYTHING other than nice things about my book even if you find glaring mistakes in it!"

At the end of the day, get someone who is not emotionally vested in you and who you trust to have the necessary skills to review the book.  Close friends and family aren't the people to be doing this! (Unless the friend or family IS a professional editor, and is editing for free).  Your parents after all are the same people who bugged all of their co-workers with your ugly baby pictures insisting you were a beautiful baby  .  

And many of us don't come from what you would call "literary" families.  I was the first person in my family to go to college.  My mom and sister read, but I wouldn't trust either of them to be able to identify a problem in my book.  They aren't stupid.  Their brains just don't work that way.  Editing requires a certain way of reading.  It requires the ability to articulate what the problem is and how to fix it.  It is a skill.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I have never ONCE said anyone must PAY for editing if they can't afford it. On several occassions, both here on KB and on my own site, I have offered suggestions on how to get editorial help on a shoestring budget. You can recruit on college campuses. You can trade services with other creative peeple (ex: I'll design your book cover if you edit my book). There is nothing wrong with using the resources around you to get the help you need.
> 
> My problem is with people who think they are "too good" for editing of any kind. The people who think a content editor will destroy their work. The people who think spelling is "voluntary" and grammar is no big deal. The people who, when you tell them the narrative voice is flat or the pacing of a story is too fast, get bent out of shape and accuse you of being mean. The people who think "being supportive" means "never say ANYTHING other than nice things about my book even if you find glaring mistakes in it!"
> 
> ...


My editor is unpaid. She was one of my former beta-readers, who free-lanced at enditing. She started editing my work and insisting on contributing to it. Now she's an institution. She's retiring from her day job and I've encouraged her to rev up her editing engines and make some money. However, one source of an editor for free is a critical fan who takes pride in your work and wants to become part of the legacy.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Rykymus said:


> But jeez, can you imagine the number of really great stories we'd all be missing if no one could publish without a "professional" editor?


Could you imagine all the great stories we could be finding if more people could manage an editor? There are careers lost for the lack of one.

People seem to think that "needs an editor" means "not good enough," that it's insulting, but it's just adding a person to your team. The quickest way to barely need one is to get one -- your next project will be better in first draft, as will be the one after that. (General "your.")

The benefit of an editor is a long-term one.

I don't know if it was this thread, or another one, but someone pretty much said that there is something elitist, anti-poor people, about the belief in editing. At least this is my interpretation. I stepped back from it, because it's too absurd.

Education is the way out of poverty -- the byproduct of an editor, is an education. You don't have to go to Yale, and you don't have to find the most expensive editor that you can, but knowledge remains power. I say this as someone who knows the poor side of the equation pretty well.

No one is saying let your kids starve to get an editor, people just make it seem like folks are saying that.

And at some point I veered from the subject meant for this response. 

I think anyone who wants to share their story should be able to do so, even without an editor. It very well might be a way to get an editor, or skilled eyes that believe in that writer. I just draw the line at people selling their work without advising the potential purchaser of its possible rough state _if the writer knows it to be not ready for Prime Time. _


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

MichelleR said:


> Could you imagine all the great stories we could be finding if more people could manage an editor? There are careers lost for the lack of one.
> 
> People seem to think that "needs an editor" means "not good enough," that it's insulting, but it's just adding a person to your team. The quickest way to barely need one is to get one -- your next project will be better in first draft, as will be the one after that. (General "your.")
> 
> ...


Taking on an editor is like taking on a therapist. "I don;t need one, because I'm not nuts." However, although your editor will attack your precious little egoistic ideas and stories, they generally know. Argue with them, it's healthy, but ignoring the editor is just plain stupid. Oftern Peg will circle something for review, and I'll say, "what's wrong with it?" and she'll just say, "what's right with it? Start from there and you find out what I mean." I had an editor once that nearly gave me a nervous breakdown (we're best of friends now). She once returned a whole chapter to me with only one word across the title - "WHY?" She was right and after 4 revisions I finally cut the entire chapter. A ghost remained as the chapter is refered to elsewher and in other books in the series, but oh what a happy revision ghost that is.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> I think you've missed the point entirely. I was never anti-editing. I couldn't afford it for my earlier stuff, so I did what I could: utilized as many volunteers as I could muster. It still ended up not being good enough to substitute for a paid editor. And don't get me wrong. The series had plenty of fans, and every day new people are reading them since I've made them free and have let me know that they enjoyed the stories.
> 
> Who am I talking about? The ones who simply don't care. It's not the ones who can't afford it (my heart's with them, and I hope things improve), but the ones who advocate not hiring editors and even go so far as to dissuade people from getting any outside help whatsoever. I made the post that I did because I didn't know if I had it left in me to go on with writing and publishing because I'd put so much energy into my early stuff that I couldn't imagine the amount I would need to put into my new stuff going forward. It turned out not to be nearly as bad as I had thought, and I've learned a great deal. It wasn't that I needed to work harder, it was that I needed some guidance in the right direction from someone who knew books and publishing. I needed to work on my weak spots that I (and my beta/editor volunteers) couldn't see.
> 
> ...


At no point in my post did I say you were ever against editing. Not once. You are making that the point of my post to sidestep the fact that you are now a part of the very machinery inside of these forums that actively pushes away new authors who were exactly like you when you could not afford professional editing.

There is no anti-editing conspiracy. What there is, is a group of authors on these forums who claim you are either contracting a professional editor or you're making us all look bad, and it's complete and total bull. There's a group of authors who can't afford to have their works edited professionally, and they're trying to use anyone they have available to proofread and "edit" their work. Every one of them. I guarantee you that when some of you do finally find the threads you claim verify your make-believe conspiracy, if we were to ask them if they ask others to read their work, they'd say yes. I guarantee you that if we found them and asked them if they had an extra 500-1000 bucks, "would you have your work edited?", they'd say yes. The majority of these authors have no idea what they're doing, but they desperately want to succeed. They just have a dream to write.

Mentor them. Point them in the right direction. Tell them what they are doing wrong. But what is really gained from ridiculing the majority of authors on these forums? This is not some argument that just began last week. We've had threads like this for years, and every time a new thread goes up from the same vocal minority of readers on the Amazon forums, we have another thread here and a brand new soap box with shiny silver trim on it. You think that what these authors really needed was someone to ridicule them into finally paying for a content editor? You think that they had the money the whole time and just needed someone to tell them that it was important?

Threads like this one and the dozen other ones like it in the recent weeks are catering to the less than 1% on these forums--many of whom had other skills or businesses that paid for editing of their work. I am such a person, in that I am a part of this very small minority of writers. I can afford editing and paying for someone to guide me down the path to becoming a better writer. I'm blessed in being able to do this. Most people cannot. You actually think that there are authors out there who are intentionally not getting editing because they don't think it's important, and that they are encouraging others to not get editing. You keep saying it--over and over again. Show me them, and we'll talk to those authors about their actual viewpoint on editing. I'd be willing to bet that they can't afford professional editing and that they try to use friends and relatives and whoever will give their books a shot.

The truth is that the majority of authors look up to the successful authors on this board for guidance on how to also become successful. And right now, we have a lot of those successful writers thumbing their noses at people who used to be in the exact same position of not being able to afford an editor. Would the vast majority of authors benefit from a content editor? Yes. Can most afford one? No. Will a copy editor help improve almost any novel? Yes. Can most afford one? No. Should everyone have proofreaders and beta readers? Yes. Is the quality of such readers widely varying and likely to miss many of your errors? Yes, but you should still try to do it. Would an author who had money for an editor refuse to pay them? There are exceptions like Anne Rice who thought she didn't need one, but it takes a certain type of ego to believe he/she is infallible. I'm just not seeing this massive anti-editing conspiracy on these forums. Just because you see a mass of unedited self-published books does not mean authors are anti-editing. It more likely means they're poor, and the way threads like these are being worded and ridiculed, the majority of these authors who can't afford editing are thinking they are included in your jests.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> At no point in my post did I say you were ever against editing. Not once. You are making that the point of my post to sidestep the fact that you are now a part of the very machinery inside of these forums that actively pushes away new authors who were exactly like you when you could not afford professional editing.
> 
> There is no anti-editing conspiracy. What there is, is a group of authors on these forums who claim you are either contracting a professional editor or you're making us all look bad, and it's complete and total bull. There's a group of authors who can't afford to have their works edited professionally, and they're trying to use anyone they have available to proofread and "edit" their work. Every one of them. I guarantee you that when some of you do finally find the threads you claim verify your make-believe conspiracy, if we were to ask them if they ask others to read their work, they'd say yes. I guarantee you that if we found them and asked them if they had an extra 500-1000 bucks, "would you have your work edited?", they'd say yes. The majority of these authors have no idea what they're doing, but they desperately want to succeed. They just have a dream to write.
> 
> ...


At this point, it's clear that you're not even reading what I've said, or you're trying to make a strawman argument. The thread is not anti-people-who-can't-afford-editing. It's talking about people who won't even so much as get someone for free to help out with the project. Editing doesn't have to cost money. In my situation, I found out that it was better that I did hire someone (to have that dedication until the project was finished, amongst other things).

Here, let me make sure you get it this time: I'M NOT MAKING FUN OF PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD EDITING. I'M NOT MAKING FUN OF PEOPLE WHO MAKE EVERY EFFORT THEIR BUDGET ALLOWS TO MAKE THE BEST BOOK POSSIBLE.

If you can't afford editing AND you think editing (by anyone else, paid or not) is a bad thing, this post might be making fun of you...

There is no anti-editing conspiracy. Never said there was. Each of the anti-editing people independently made their decisions, and each of them were vocal about taking a dump in a bag and immediately marking it for sale for their own reasons. The fact is, they existed. They were here. Take off the blinders or search around a bit. Here, I'll save you a little time for the first one: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,79520.0.html

There's no point in responding to any more of it. What you are trying to say is that I'm a hypocrite for saying what I've said now vs. what I've said in the past, and that I push people away instead of helping them, and to that, I say you're lying. Maybe you haven't kept up with what I've been doing and saying around here, but I help people all the time. Sorry you feel that way, but it's simply untrue.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Popcorn time.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> Popcorn time.












In all seriousness, perhaps some deep breaths are in order? I don't Brian's posts -- and despite Lynn being his editor, I don't know him -- as forgetting about his roots, or against people who are where he once was. That seems like reading a lot into this, particularly the part where he was accused of deliberately misunderstanding something in order as a diversion. I'm pretty sure everyone here is well-meaning.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> I'm pretty sure everyone here is well-meaning.


I think so too, but comments like this just stir the pot: "Each of the anti-editing people independently made their decisions, and each of them were vocal about taking a dump in a bag and immediately marking it for sale for their own reasons."

Fwiw, I've seen one or two true anti-editing people, but they were hardly the vanguard of any real movement. The same goes for the "you must hire a pro" people. I really can't remember any, but I'm sure they're out there. Most people, by far, are more reasonable and fall somewhere in the middle.

I think most of us agree that you should use all of the tools at your disposal to put out the best product possible. And there might be more tools out there than you think.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

MichelleR said:


> I'm pretty sure everyone here is well-meaning.


   Take it back! Take it back!


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

MichelleR said:


> In all seriousness, perhaps some deep breaths are in order? I don't Brian's posts -- and despite Lynn being his editor, I don't know him -- as forgetting about his roots, or against people who are where he once was. That seems like reading a lot into this, particularly the part where he was accused of deliberately misunderstanding something in order as a diversion. I'm pretty sure everyone here is well-meaning.


My reply probably seems more heated than it really was. Inflammatory, sure, but I'm way beyond being really hurt by things like this. People have made a number of misstatements about me in the past. I'm kind of used to it by now. The only thing I can do is let people know what I really feel and move forward. It's irritating to have one's stance on issues misrepresented, but it wouldn't be the first time. lol



Monique said:


> I think so too, but comments like this just stir the pot: "Each of the anti-editing people independently made their decisions, and each of them were vocal about taking a dump in a bag and immediately marking it for sale for their own reasons."
> 
> Fwiw, I've seen one or two true anti-editing people, but they were hardly the vanguard of any real movement. The same goes for the "you must hire a pro" people. I really can't remember any, but I'm sure they're out there. Most people, by far, are more reasonable and fall somewhere in the middle.
> 
> I think most of us agree that you should use all of the tools at your disposal to put out the best product possible. And there might be more tools out there than you think.


Agreed. I never said it was a vanguard movement or some kind of conspiracy, quite the contrary. They pop up here from time to time, and those types are the ones I was referring to. There are many more beyond these forums, but I'm not crazy enough to think they all got together and decided, "Yes, we'll turn this into a movement."

Also, I'm glad you've seen them before, rare as they are. At least I'm not the only one seeing things. ;P


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

The vanguard comment was not directed at you, Brian. The stirring the pot comment was.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Monique said:


> The vanguard comment was not directed at you, Brian. The stirring the pot comment was.


Ah, I thought both of them were.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Take it back! Take it back!


Why? The color looks good on me, it's in my size, I've lost the receipt, and I was told that all sales are final.


----------



## Kent Kelly (Feb 12, 2011)

I just don't want to see the iconoclasts become the new gatekeepers.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> At this point, it's clear that you're not even reading what I've said, or you're trying to make a strawman argument. The thread is not anti-people-who-can't-afford-editing. It's talking about people who won't even so much as get someone for free to help out with the project. Editing doesn't have to cost money. In my situation, I found out that it was better that I did hire someone (to have that dedication until the project was finished, amongst other things).
> 
> Here, let me make sure you get it this time: I'M NOT MAKING FUN OF PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD EDITING. I'M NOT MAKING FUN OF PEOPLE WHO MAKE EVERY EFFORT THEIR BUDGET ALLOWS TO MAKE THE BEST BOOK POSSIBLE.
> 
> ...


I mentioned your story because I empathized with it when you wrote that post. I wanted you to succeed, and I'm glad you didn't quit--despite what you felt was a poor performance in your first series. And your situation, one without seeming hope of being able to afford quality editing until later in your journey when the zombie series had given you a chance to fund other work, is one that you share with many people--authors who have sent a couple of messages to me on these forums and more through email after reading my posts in this thread. Like the people you are addressing and pointing a finger at, you didn't do everything you could to edit your first series. According to your very comments above, all you should have had to do was get some free services. It's that easy, right? But back then, despite what you claim are obvious solutions to everyone else around here, you didn't use those. Your zombie series was used by a vocal minority of readers on places like Amazon as a poster child for what was going wrong in our movement, and it resulted in hate mail that almost pushed you over a precipice with no return (a complete stop to your writing career). Like these terrible authors you are so passionate about, you didn't even realize many of the avenues open to you, but you saved up enough money to get your work professionally edited--you took the route that was available to you financially. I'm glad you did. Good for you.

To say you don't know the damage successful authors like yourself and others have done to the fragmentation of our community, especially on these forums, would be an understatement. I'm not sure why you and others here do not see the connections between your posts here, including the "taking a dump in a bag" comment quoted above, and applying it to a generalized group of people without specificity. Your linked thread is a specific person who does more than just not edit his books, he also does many things that endanger his brand and alienate his potential reader base. "Anti-editing" is only a part of his problem set, and he's beyond any of our reach and quite frankly seems to not want our help. I'll say he's stubborn and leave it at that.

Yet, many authors consider themselves to be in your anti-editing category and targeted in the many threads that are constantly posted on these forums about the poor quality indies that are giving the rest of us a bad name. Anti-editing could just as easily mean "without editing" as soon as "opposed to editing", and we have people like Hugh who posted here thinking he was in your grouping. Do you have any idea how many other quality authors felt similarly?

Every option these authors without editors and money try seems to get met with ridicule here (not necessarily by you. Please understand that I'm responding to a general trend here.) They'll get their friends or loved ones to edit for free, and then they'll find threads where successful authors berate such groups of authors who get free services from family as being stupid because it's not professional or quality. These authors will try to start Kickstarter or other funding projects to help them utilize appropriate editing or cover art, and then hear from some on these forums about how its unnecessary and taking readers for a ride or immoral or whatever. They're damned if they do and damned if they don't, and they stop trying to engage us, and they cut themselves off from our help and support. After all, we made it clear we didn't want them here anyway, right? They're on the other side of the fence that many of you have created here.

You can continue to think you're a beacon of light on a hill--people who label others as producers of "dung in a bag for sale" often do. Tough love, people will sometimes call it--thinking their coy expressions will somehow impart wisdom to the ignorant masses. I, however, think it's at the very least misguided and the very most... well... many of you were in their place less than 8 months ago. It's amazing what time and success will do to people. The language and posturing here make it almost impossible for others that are in the same situation to approach any of you about how they too can get on track with the resources they have available.

Authors like the one in the thread you are talking about are the extreme exception. We remember authors like that because they are so rare. Most authors want to do better. They want to save up for a proper edit, but they don't have the means. That's what I'm saying. To you, saying "anti-editing" and "dung in a bag" is a humorous happy-fun-time that you and your other successful friends can all agree on because you keep talking about it and see it as an inside joke. To the ones included in the category by default, it's just another reminder that they don't belong here by a group of posters who vocally and constantly post these kinds of generic, blanket threads.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

If you're an author with no formal education or professional experience in writing fiction, do you think it's out of bounds or in any way undesirable for other authors to find editors among friends, family, readers, and fellow writers who have no formal education or professional experience in editing?


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> If you're an author with no formal education or professional experience in writing fiction, do you think it's out of bounds or in any way undesirable for other authors to find editors among friends, family, readers, and fellow writers who have no formal education or professional experience in editing?


I think we should be guiding people toward the light instead of comparing them to placebo salesmen and purveyors of feces in a tote. I think an author who does the above in your quote is at least trying, and that showing of effort means that guidance from the rest of us and not mockery is more likely to take hold and result in better editing.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2012)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> If you're an author with no formal education or professional experience in writing fiction, do you think it's out of bounds or in any way undesirable for other authors to find editors among friends, family, readers, and fellow writers who have no formal education or professional experience in editing?


I would say first GET some education. Community colleges often have low-cost continuing education courses in writing. Most states have writer's groups that you can join. Pick up some style guides from the store or borrow them from the library and learn the basics. Get to the library and make friends with the librarian. You would be amazed at the resource they can be. The thing is to not just go through the motions so you can say "But I did get an editor!" The thing is to find people you trust to give you the right advice, even if you don't want to hear it. Do you have a core group of people around you who can articulate a problem, offer suggestions to fix it, and have the will to look you in the eye and say "I'm sorry, but this just does not work" when it needs to be said? It doesn't matter if the person has a PhD or a high school diploma. Do you, as the author, trust the success of your book to this person you are giving editorial duty to? Or are you just getting someone to read it so you can say you got an editor?


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> I think we should be guiding people toward the light instead of comparing them to placebo salesmen and purveyors of feces in a tote.


While I do see a bit of a divide that's formed on these forums on various issues, and could be sometimes categorized as more successful vs. less successful, I think there are other dividing lines as well, like old kb-ers vs. new kb-ers, and genre lines, and fiction vs. nonfiction, and a host of other things. I've gotten hot under the collar about a few things before too.

But I guess I'd like to say in response...

1-This happens to be the most well-reasoned, nicest threads on editing I've seen in a long time. Yay, Kindleboards! So, perhaps it's a sign that we're actually moving in a more positive direction, and there will be a more open discussion from here on out.

2-Guiding people toward the light how? Ask any person on this board who's "successful" how they did it, and they'll probably tell you they don't really know. It happened. They kept on going, and one day, there was an explosion, and things got better. If they don't tell you that, and they have a reason, I bet money none of those reasons are the same reason, rendering the advice moot. If there's any way to guide people toward the light, it's only to tell them this: Keep writing books.

The more they write, the better they'll write.
The more they write, the better they'll get at figuring out what their individual problem areas are and work at correcting them.
The more they write, (and publish) the more money they'll make, and the closer they'll get to being able to pay editors.

Of course, I suppose that last thing sounds like I'm advocating people to publish before they're polished. Maybe I am. I don't know. But someone else made a comment up there about education being the way out of poverty. And I think that we've never lived in a time period where information and opportunity was as plentiful as it is now. Or...what did Matt Damon's character say in _Good Will Hunting_? Something about how you could have a Harvard education if you had a library card? Right--so the information on how to write a better book and how to write standard English is all out there--much of it free and readily available. A motivated, determined person will find it. Not that I'm saying we abandon new writers or refuse to help them out. Just that...

Okay, now I've lost my point. I guess it's twofold. One is that the best advice you can give to a writer is to keep honing his craft. And the next point is that if you really can't afford an editor, and the unpaid help you find is sub par, then you need to do what you can yourself. And there's information out there to help you do that. This board, however, has historically focused on the business side of things, and it's not the place I come to when I'm looking for advice on how to be a better writer. It's the place I come to find out if everyone else's dashboard is screwed up. (Also, I like the funny threads about David Daglish.)

Which is all to say, in closing, I feel your frustration. And while I think sometimes people on this board (myself included) can come off with a sort of snappish tone occasionally, most people who frequent this place have their heart in the right place. (A few days ago, I ventured into the land that will not be mentioned again, and...well, there's not much to complain about here in comparison.)


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

I'm deliberately setting up something of a strawman here.

If you don't have an MFA from Iowa, Johns Hopkins, or Columbia--or at the _very_ least a writing-slanted English degree from a well-regarded private university--then maybe you should wait to write a novel until you can afford to get one. A good education isn't cheap, but it will improve your plotting, your use of language, and your fundamental understand of what makes for a good story. It's your responsibility to make sure your product is the highest quality it can be before you put it out there for reader consumption.

I love editors. We should all be lucky enough to have a good one for everything we write. Including snotty forum posts. (Which is intended only as a self-reflecting statement.  ) I think a lot of the opinions on this thread and the other were highly informative and well-advised.

Still--how many people just got eliminated? Julie, what's the difference between attending a couple community college writing workshops and asking for editing from your buddy who works the city desk or just reads a ton of books and can't abide a dangling participle?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> " It's your responsibility to make sure your product is the highest quality it can be before you put it out there for reader consumption."


For KDP, the author and Amazon have standing to define responsibilities. I sure have no standing to define another author's responsibilities.


----------



## Rykymus (Dec 3, 2011)

> If you don't have an MFA from Iowa, Johns Hopkins, or Columbia--or at the very least a writing-slanted English degree from a well-regarded private university--then maybe you should wait to write a novel until you can afford to get one. A good education isn't cheap, but it will improve your plotting, your use of language, and your fundamental understand of what makes for a good story. It's your responsibility to make sure your product is the highest quality it can be before you put it out there for reader consumption.


That's silly. Some people a naturally gifted writers. Some people learn to become gifted writers. A formal education in _writing _only means you once knew what the established _correct _way to write. It doesn't mean you will be any good at it. Just as using the world's greatest editor doesn't mean your work is going to sell. All that matters is that you care enough to do everything within your power to create the best work possible for you. Anything short of that is disrespectful of the reader.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Rykymus said:


> That's silly. Some people a naturally gifted writers. Some people learn to become gifted writers. A formal education in _writing _only means you once knew what the established _correct _way to write. It doesn't mean you will be any good at it. Just as using the world's greatest editor doesn't mean your work is going to sell. All that matters is that you care enough to do everything within your power to create the best work possible for you. Anything short of that is disrespectful of the reader.


I went to Columbia and studied Chinese History on a Doctoral tract. Sure it helped me with content, but I learned to author at Dickens' knee, and Melville's harpoon, and Auntie Jane Austen's hem, and my younger mentor Stephen King's Dark Tower. I always make it a point to deride such lofty things as an education as prerequisite to naturally acquired talents. In fact, I refer to Columbia University in my flagship novel as Old Pew, and the scenes set there would make you want to apply to Kingsborough Community College instead.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

I don't think anyone is going to win this argument. This is like a dentistry argument. You should go to the dentist every six months! You should get regular check-ups so you can have amazing teeth! You should get braces because you owe it to yourself to look as good as you can!

Unless you cannot afford any of these things, and this entire conversation becomes moot. It's very hard to convince someone that has eaten ramen for six months that they should skip paying the electric bill and hire a proofreader for their book instead. Sometimes the books are the only income. I'm lucky in that I have a day job and publishing contracts that bring in money (despite the lack of an MFA, shockingly enough). I can afford the dentist. I can afford to have my books edited, because I have the income for it. This is kind of like the professional covers argument. Should you have a professional cover? Sure, it helps sales. Does it always? No. 

The bottom line is that Amazon does not have a space required for 'editor' like they do author name. Until then, it's going to be optional, just like ISBN. Should you have one? Ideally. Is Amazon enforcing it? Nope. Until then, anything goes.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2012)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> Still--how many people just got eliminated? *****, what's the difference between attending a couple community college writing workshops and asking for editing from your buddy who works the city desk or just reads a ton of books and can't abide a dangling participle?


The difference is that if you attend the workshops, you expand your own knowledge of the craft and need less outside help. If you are depending on your buddy, you have to depend on him to know what he is doing. You can hire the greatest editor on the planet, but if you personally can't construct a thoughtful sentence or don't know what the word "pacing" means, an editor can't help you. It's like trying to teach trig or calculus to a 3 year old. I don't care how good the teacher is. The kid ain't gonna get it.

And again, do you trust your buddy with the success of your book? Are you comfortable putting the fate of your book in the hands of this person? Is he going to be able to tell you what is wrong and give you suggestions to fix it, or is he just going to say "Hey, man, I like it."


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2012)

jillmyles said:


> The bottom line is that Amazon does not have a space required for 'editor' like they do author name. Until then, it's going to be optional, just like ISBN. Should you have one? Ideally. Is Amazon enforcing it? Nope. Until then, anything goes.


They have not enforced hiring an editor, but they HAVE been enforcing content. We've seen plenty of threads here on KB where authors got an email from Amazon over grammar, spelling, and typos. Amazon reserves the right to deactivate a book that doesn't meet certain minimum standards. Of course, they have never quantified those standards, so we're still left in the dark.  But they do enforce the quality of the finished product.


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> They have not enforced hiring an editor, but they HAVE been enforcing content. We've seen plenty of threads here on KB where authors got an email from Amazon over grammar, spelling, and typos. Amazon reserves the right to deactivate a book that doesn't meet certain minimum standards. Of course, they have never quantified those standards, so we're still left in the dark.  But they do enforce the quality of the finished product.


But they only pursue it if someone complains. And then all they do is send you an email. I know for a short time they deactivated the books, but I got flagged on one of mine once and I took my sweet time fixing it, and they never deactivated the book. It's not enforceable as it is right now.

Unless in the future, of course, Amazon hires a staff of editors that they have certified and you have to go through one of them to get your book approved. I'm now seeing dystopian images of Amazon control, lol.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

jillmyles said:


> Unless you cannot afford any of these things, and this entire conversation becomes moot. It's very hard to convince someone that has eaten ramen for six months that they should skip paying the electric bill and hire a proofreader for their book instead.


I suppose you could say the debate is moot-if anyone was actually arguing that you should sell your organs to have your book edited. But no one's arguing your moot point. Some of the bones of contention in this ongoing saga include the following:

1. Editors don't know any more than your mom and your buddies (i.e., beta readers).

2. Real writers don't need editors.

3. You should be pitied if readers feel cheated by your poorly edited book.

4. Editors are charlatans.

5. Editors spoil the true and authentic voice you were born with (because you're you).

Rex seems to think these are strawmen. But I've seen these sentiments often enough to conclude that they're widely held beliefs.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "But I've seen these sentiments often enough to conclude that they're widely held beliefs. "


OK. Suppose they are widely held. So what?


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Terrence,

Some people believe fairies make it rain and that you can call them out of the woods with crystal bells. It may or may not be a problem that people believe such things (I won't get into it because of the prohibition against political talk here). Nonetheless, I see no problem disputing the truth of such beliefs. 

So, in Terrence-like fashion, let me return the question: do you have a problem with me disputing such beliefs?


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

jillmyles said:


> Unless you cannot afford any of these things, and this entire conversation becomes moot.


Why?



jillmyles said:


> It's very hard to convince someone that has eaten ramen for six months that they should skip paying the electric bill and hire a proofreader for their book instead.


I'm not sure anyone is making that argument.

The topic only becomes moot if a writer absolutely has a deadline to publish, or else, and has to publish to Amazon and similar sites. My thing has never been don't publish -- my thing is that there are a number of options, one of them being wait until you can obtain what you need. Another being to go somewhere where you can disclose the state of your book.

It would be a shame if people couldn't share their writing due to finances, but there are lots of places to share. Why must the venue be a site where people expect certain standards you can't meet? Why must the publication date be RightNow?

My average grocery budget for several months was $7 - $10 a week. Ramen Noodles and 3 for $1 Mac and Cheese was the menu, the only menu. I could have had another dollar, but I would go to the movies. I sure wanted a lot of things -- like non-pasta based meals that were not a radioactive shade of orange -- and not to be renting a room from a woman who, er, could be rented, but I in no way thought I was owed a publishing contract -- which would have been the equivalent back then. I was always welcome to share my scribblings with friends.

Although, there was the time I shared a naughty story I wrote with my boyfriend over the phone, and found out that the guy in the next room heard the whole call. Haven't seen the guy in the next room in fifteen years -- see the BF every day, now have the same last name.

Anyhow, I'm having real confusion over people acting like saying a book isn't up to a certain standard is the same as wanting to deny people a voice, and that a lack of money -- or volunteers -- should never be prohibitive.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Some people believe fairies make it rain and that you can call them out of the woods with crystal bells. It may or may not be a problem that people believe such things (I won't get into it because of the prohibition against political talk here). Nonetheless, I see no problem disputing the truth of such beliefs.


Fairies?



> Why must the venue be a site where people expect certain standards you can't meet?


It doesn't have to be. It's Amazon's venue, Amazon sets its standards, and it is the venue Amazon and the author have chosen. The author has chosen to supply, and Amazon has chosen to distribute.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The difference is that if you attend the workshops, you expand your own knowledge of the craft and need less outside help. If you are depending on your buddy, you have to depend on him to know what he is doing. You can hire the greatest editor on the planet, but if you personally can't construct a thoughtful sentence or don't know what the word "pacing" means, an editor can't help you. It's like trying to teach trig or calculus to a 3 year old. I don't care how good the teacher is. The kid ain't gonna get it.
> 
> And again, do you trust your buddy with the success of your book? Are you comfortable putting the fate of your book in the hands of this person? Is he going to be able to tell you what is wrong and give you suggestions to fix it, or is he just going to say "Hey, man, I like it."


Okay. My point was mostly rhetorical. I don't genuinely think every writer needs to have a diploma from Iowa framed above their desk. I'm with _Ratatouille_ on this one. A good writer can come from anywhere.

But when it comes to putting out the best possible work, I just don't see any difference between pursuing an education and bringing on an editor. They both seem pretty helpful to me. Despite some of the stereotypes of the ivory tower in this thread, an education will make you a better writer, in part because you're no longer depending on yourself alone to know what you're doing. And to put it in the language a lot of people have used about editing, the more you spend, the better your chances of coming away with a stronger grasp of writing.

I bet this is starting to sound a bit elitist, isn't it? What would be the response to a 300-post-long thread where everyone agrees that if you don't have an MFA, you're not taking this seriously?

Well, if you don't have that diploma up on your wall--if you haven't proven you'll take every step to make your work the best, including pursuit of a professional education--I don't see where you have any right to judge people who don't use professional editors. Apparently you're not taking this any more seriously than they are.

(Qualifications: All uses of "you" are meant in an impersonal, hypothetical sense. And I honestly don't care whether you're the resident professor at Hopkins or some dude who was illiterate until last September. Nothing in this post should be taken as anti-editor. I just think that, whatever standards we hold for other writers, we better make dang sure we're applying those standards to ourselves, too.)


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

WHDean said:


> *Some people believe fairies make it rain and that you can call them out of the woods with crystal bells.* It may or may not be a problem that people believe such things (I won't get into it because of the prohibition against political talk here).


That's a political statement? Which candidate is espousing that?


Never mind, rhetorical, I couldn't resist. As you were.


Betsy


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

MichelleR said:


> Why?
> 
> I'm not sure anyone is making that argument.


No? Someone upthread said we should all have a MFA before pursuing fiction writing.



> The topic only becomes moot if a writer absolutely has a deadline to publish, or else, and has to publish to Amazon and similar sites. My thing has never been don't publish -- my thing is that there are a number of options, one of them being wait until you can obtain what you need. Another being to go somewhere where you can disclose the state of your book.
> 
> It would be a shame if people couldn't share their writing due to finances, but there are lots of places to share. Why must the venue be a site where people expect certain standards you can't meet? Why must the publication date be RightNow?


But what is the standard? And it is very easy to say the publication must wait until it is perfect, but not all situations can afford that. I have a few books I've been sitting on for months to get edited first, because it's not critical for me at the moment. But if I lost my job tomorrow? I would be pursuing every avenue to make money that I could.



> My average grocery budget for several months was $7 - $10 a week. Ramen Noodles and 3 for $1 Mac and Cheese was the menu, the only menu. I could have had another dollar, but I would go to the movies. I sure wanted a lot of things -- like non-pasta based meals that were not a radioactive shade of orange -- and not to be renting a room from a woman who, er, could be rented, but I in no way thought I was owed a publishing contract -- which would have been the equivalent back then. I was always welcome to share my scribblings with friends.


But this isn't about a publishing contract. Pursuit of a trad pub contract is a different sort of creature than using the outlets available to you - Amazon, Smashwords, B&N, etc.



> Anyhow, I'm having real confusion over people acting like saying a book isn't up to a certain standard is the same as wanting to deny people a voice, and that a lack of money -- or volunteers -- should never be prohibitive.


I don't think that was what I was saying? I was saying that until Amazon requires editing, it's going to be at a person's discretion as to whether or not they do that. I put out a few books in the beginning that were not properly edited, and I went back and had them edited. Everything I put out in the future has been properly edited. It's a choice, and I choose to make my product as good as I can make it.

But there are people on the Kindleboards that are more limited in their choices, and I don't feel like we should castigate them for publishing when they don't have a MFA.

But judging from this thread, it's clear that I am not good at arguing.  I am one of the biggest fans of getting your stuff edited. Every time I get a document back from my editors, I cringe at how bad it was before I turned it in.

I'm just saying that I'm not judging anyone who has not chosen to have their books edited simply because we don't know the financial situations of everyone involved. We are all running our own businesses here, and it is a business choice to make. If you buy a book and it's poorly edited, vote with your review button (or your return button) so the vendor knows there is a problem. Enough feedback and it will get fixed. Or not, but you can at least warn away others before making the same mistake.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Well, if you don't have that diploma up on your wall--if you haven't proven you'll take every step to make your work the best, including pursuit of a professional education


Agree. The notion that any product is the best it can be doesn't stand up to scrutiny. That standard implies there is absolutely nothing that can make it better.

Producers choose a standard for their product. Every producer does it. Every standard falls short of the best it can be. A given standard is sufficient for a given use.


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Producers choose a standard for their product. Every producer does it. Every standard falls short of the best it can be. A given standard is sufficient for a given use.


This is what I was trying to say (and totally failing in a very tl;dr sort of way).

This will also teach me to argue before coffee.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

jillmyles said:


> No? Someone upthread said we should all have a MFA before pursuing fiction writing.


I don't think anyone actually said that. I've been doing most of the talking about MFAs, I think, but I don't at all mean that everyone should have one. In a way, I'm saying the opposite.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

I think Edward was playing devil's advocate with that MFA thing  
It's a relevant question to ask in this conversation - I'm not sure he is stating a opinion so much as throwing out a question.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

OK I've been struggling to figure this out.

I totally agree that a writer should use the best means at their disposal to create the best possible story. For example, my husband reminded me that when I exhibit my artwork, I have so far managed to find a way to pay for professional framing. (Although an unframed drawing is much more difficult to sell, and is obviously unframed while a self-edited story may not _ necessarily_ be obviously unedited (or that's my rationalization)) I'm hoping very much that in the near future I'll be able to afford professional editing. More than that, I'm actively looking for somebody who I can work with - it must be great to find a good editor to "gets" what you are trying to achieve.

Wait till I can afford it?

I suppose that is one way of doing it.

But that might never happen. Too depressing to consider. Rather do my best with what I've got.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2012)

At the end of the day, publishing is a business, not a charity. You are selling a product. That product should meet certain specifications of the target market. It the target market determines than the product does not meet those standards (i.e complains about poor editing or lack of editing), that is your fault regardless of your financial situation. It is not the fault of the public that thought it was buying something that met certain standards and got something else.

If I go into a restaurant and order a steak, I expect the waiter to bring me a steak. If he comes back to my table with salisbury steak, I have every right to complain and the owner has no right to say "Hey, I can't afford to buy steak right now, but the salisbury steak is the same thing." It doesn't become my fault as the customer that the restaurant can't afford to sell steak. If they can't afford to sell it, just take it off the menu.

And to clarify, this is NOT about a random typo or a dropped comma. People try to oversimplify the discussion try to make it about tiny things. Sure, there is the occassional Grammar Nazi that will break out a style guide and check to see if you are using semi-colons wrong. THAT is not what we are talking about. If the restaurant cooked my steak slightly overdone but otherwise it was still good, I wouldn't be flipping out that the steak was not perfect. I'd still enjoy the steak.

It is simply a matter of not just saying "I did my best." It's about saying "I have used _every resource available at my disposal _ to produce something worth buying." It is a subtle distinction...the kind of distinction that gets lost in internet discussions


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> It the target market determines than the product does not meet those standards (i.e complains about poor editing or lack of editing), that is your fault regardless of your financial situation.


I agree with that. That's common sense.

The difficulty comes before that point, with second guessing yourself - "Is it good enough? Will they complain?"

I'm regretting posting in this thread as reading back across my posts I seem to be whining. Nobody forced me to try this writing thing, and I dont HAVE to publish what I write. I just _want_ to.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2012)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> I just think that, whatever standards we hold for other writers, we better make dang sure we're applying those standards to ourselves, too.)


I never expect more out of people than I am willing to do myself.

My B.A. is in English, Liberal Arts with a Concentration in Honors Studies and a specialization in marketing. I interned for an educational resource publisher. I attend writer conferences. I've done freelance writing and worked with editors from small presses and regional publishers. And no, at no point have I ever once said everyone HAS to do everything I have done. I don't believe ANYONE in this thread has said that, despite the fact that some people keep repeating arguments against statements that were never made.

All I am saying is to surround yourself with critical people who can articulate problems and have the will to do so. What I often see when writers edit each other's work is the incessant need to not "hurt someone's feelings" so they only mention superficial things and don't address core problems. And you, as the writer, need to be willing to hear it.

I just had a situation the other day when I found out some writer had posted my last rejection letter to her on her blog. Now mind you, I STOPPED giving automatic critiques of stories last year because writers are crazy.  But I still offer them if you request a critique. *This girl specifically requested a critique.* Not only did she ignore everything I said, but she insulted me and made implications about my family life. And her fellow writers all came to her defense and told her how great her writing was. But her writing is NOT great. It is rather sub par and while she has some potential, she needs a lot of work.

Now the funny part is, she has also sent me two other stories (AFTER her blog post BTW) for other projects making the SAME mistakes I pointed out in her last rejection! She is just refusing to learn.

She is EXACTLY what I would call an "anti-editing" person. She refuses to seek out those who offer genuine feedback to improve, and she refuses to learn. She is the type of person I complain about when I talk about people who refuse to get help with editing.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2012)

Masha du Toit said:


> I agree with that. That's common sense.
> 
> The difficulty comes before that point, with second guessing yourself - "Is it good enough? Will they complain?"


I hear this often and frankly it doesn't make much sense to me. I assume if people are writing in a particular genre that they also READ in that genre. If you are reading regularly in a genre, you eventually should understand the expectations of that genre. The horror genre, for example, has different expectations regarding things like pacing and character development and such than the romance genre. One is not better or worse. They are just different. Chick lit has a different set of expectations regarding mood and theme than high fantasy. If you read voraciously and critically, you eventually learn a great deal.

This is actually one of the reasons I started to write book reviews, because they forced me to read CRITICALLY and think about why I did or did not like a book. Once you can train yourself to do that, you can begin to identify the problems in your own work and won't worry about second-guessing yourself.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> All I am saying is to surround yourself with critical people who can articulate problems and have the will to do so. What I often see when writers edit each other's work is the incessant need to not "hurt someone's feelings" so they only mention superficial things and don't address core problems. And you, as the writer, need to be willing to hear it.


I think we're pretty much on the same page, actually. I agree with your steak and restaurant analogy. I'm just curious why it's okay for an author to come from an amateur background--in the sense of no formal education or professional experience--but if authors turn to amateur editors (in the same sense of the word), You're Doing It Wrong.

I know a lot of people _aren't_ saying that. You're clearly not. In fact, most people are being pretty reasonable. It's hard to argue with "just get the best help you can, and be aware that the best help is often paid."

Still, some of the responses in this thread and the other one have struck me as kind of snobby. Or restricted by a narrow personal experience, at the very least. Maybe I'm imagining things. But if that attitude is out there, I think authors should be hesitant to point fingers while forgiving themselves for very similar sins.

(By the way, I'm pretty sure I snagged one of your rejections a couple years ago, Julie. It's fun to bump into people from what you might call the Duotrope circle out here in another realm of the world.  )


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Usually a good book is not littered with typo's, spelling and grammar problems regardless of the genre, whether indie or big pub. Most readers don't like to wade through all that junk and I don't either. So the bottomline is that behooves the author to make sure their story is as clean as possible, otherwise you will turn-off readers from your wonderful story and they will leave you rotten reviews because you let them down. Then you will start a thread on KB about some horrible reviews you received. 

However you do it does not matter. The reader doesn't care who your editor is. Doesn't matter if it was a high-end pro or Aunt Ruth the English teacher at the local high school or your dog or cat. Nobody cares who/what process you used to produce a good clean story. No reader thinks, "I wonder who the editor is? I'm sure they have an MFA? I wonder what other books they've edited?" 

Ultimately it is the authors and publishers (that's you) responsibility to produce a clean book. The buck stops there. If the editor you hired doesn't do a good job you have to fix it. If you are going to spend a year or 6 months or 3 months writing a story, do your level best to have a clean story. You owe it to yourself. Those 1 star reviews last a long time.

Now there are some genres and subs where readers are not as fussy, but that's another story and another can of worms.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Masha du Toit,

A lot of the anti-editing line comes down to attitude. All of us start out wanting validation. But “professionalizing” entails giving up on that as a short-term goal in order to focus on the objective (in this case) of publishing a book. 

Once you’re reoriented toward a goal, your attitude changes. You don’t take every criticism as an attack on you personally, and you always look to how it might help you. And you don’t whine about the things you can’t afford; you look for the things you need to do and the people you need to help you. That doesn’t mean you need a professional editor, etc.; there are a lot of ways of getting this kind of help on a zero budget. It means you use your head instead of your resentment. 

Now some people never “professionalize” in this sense. They never get over wanting instant and constant validation, and they become rankled when they don’t get it. So they tell themselves stories like the five points I posted earlier.   

It seems to me your on the professionalization track. I suggest you keep going in that direction and ignore the conspiracies.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> That's a political statement? Which candidate is espousing that?
> 
> 
> Never mind, rhetorical, I couldn't resist. As you were.
> ...


My sources tell me that members of the Order of the Crystal Bell always hide their identities by pretending they don't belong. That's how they work their way into positions of control...like forum moderators..._ [cue creepy music]_


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> But when it comes to putting out the best possible work, I just don't see any difference between pursuing an education and bringing on an editor. They both seem pretty helpful to me. Despite some of the stereotypes of the ivory tower in this thread, an education will make you a better writer, in part because you're no longer depending on yourself alone to know what you're doing. And to put it in the language a lot of people have used about editing, the more you spend, the better your chances of coming away with a stronger grasp of writing.


It always surprises me that this position actually has to _argued for _ when it should be taken for granted.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Now some people never "professionalize" in this sense.


Thank God for that.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2012)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> (By the way, I'm pretty sure I snagged one of your rejections a couple years ago, *****. It's fun to bump into people from what you might call the Duotrope circle out here in another realm of the world.  )


I should have this framed as evidence writers who get such rejections need not be scarred for life


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Thank God for that.


Since the antecedent of _this _ in the phrase _professionalize in this sense _ was _use your head instead of your resentment_ (etc.), I can only think of two reasons for your response:

1. You didn't understand what I said.

2. You run a lucrative counselling service for disaffected writers.

(I'm hoping it's the second.)


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I can only think of two reasons for your response:


Thank God you got two.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> It is simply a matter of not just saying "I did my best." It's about saying "I have used _every resource available at my disposal _ to produce something worth buying." It is a subtle distinction...the kind of distinction that gets lost in internet discussions


The problem is, 'every resource available at my disposal' is a vague phrase. I have thousands of dollars in the bank. Should I be spending thousands on the best editor available to produce something worth buying? And if I don't, am I shortchanging my readers? Some on here seem to be making that claim. After all, if I don't spend all my money, I'm not using every resource at my disposal.

Also, people tend to forget that each author brings a different skill set to the table. It is entirely possible that an author who self-edits can put out a cleaner book than one who pays an editor to do it for them. But according to the consensus of some here, that self-editing author is not only short-changing their readers, but is also unethical.

What some of us are saying, is that there is a small, but very vocal and opinionated group here who think it should be done their way, or it's being done wrong. The fact is, it all comes down to the finished product, not how you got there. And Rex is correct - many writers choose not to put up with that kind of abuse, and instead stay away and focus on their writing and accumulating sales. (Something we're told time and time again here will never happen unless we listen to the 'experts'.)


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

WHDean said:


> I suppose you could say the debate is moot-if anyone was actually arguing that you should sell your organs to have your book edited. But no one's arguing your moot point. Some of the bones of contention in this ongoing saga include the following:
> 
> 1. Editors don't know any more than your mom and your buddies (i.e., beta readers).
> 
> ...


[citation needed] from you.

And please... please... for the love of all that's holy... do not cite an author that holds zero credibility on these forums. Please... I beg of you. Do not put another citation of a person that posts their own 5 star reviews to combat reader reviews and thinks this is a good idea. Please do not post another person who summarizes his entire book and posts it as his book blurb. Please... do not post another link to him.

Here's my point. Again. These threads and the general, encompassing insults that go with them are not benefiting any authors in our community. They are neither constructive nor informative. They are accusatory and inflammatory. My request is that we simply stop trying to push away all the new authors. If you actually think labeling everyone starting out as crap sellers is adding to our collective wisdom or growth as an independent community, you're crazy. We've lost thousands of authors from this kind of behavior. I can name dozens of high quality authors that I've met on these forums over the past couple years that will never post here again because they're sick of the attitudes and entitlement, and many of these authors are in the top paid lists consistently. We're losing more knowledge and good dialogue than we're gaining by allowing this kind of mentality on these forums. We should not be encouraging degrading and mocking behavior to continue.

Should authors get more education? Absolutely, and coming to these boards should be a positive step in that direction, imo. We say that we can't do craft threads, and maybe we can't because of the thread churn, but maybe we could ask Betsy for a sticky thread that links to some of the craft threads, the educational threads about Community Colleges, what editors do, maybe Harry Dewulf's "what to expect from an editor series", etc. This way we don't get so frustrated when new authors come in and don't search for our brilliant words of wisdom elsewhere. We can easily point them in the right direction, and I know we'll get a better response. We'll also feel less need to rant and rave about our efforts going to waste. Many of us hate to repeat ourselves.

We're supposed to be showing instead of telling, but what we mostly do in these threads is tell other people that they're idiots for not using editors. I think we can and should do better than this. I'm an engineer. When someone comes to me and says "we have a problem", I offer solutions. I don't complain about who I feel is the source of the problem. I may offer an analysis of where the problem starts so that we might come to a better solution, but I don't just complain, mock, and insult when someone mentions a big problem.

Right now, we have a big problem. We have a lot of authors who cannot afford editors but they may be fantastic authors. Right now, the general consensus on these boards seems to be that posting another thread so a dozen people can say "I'm not the problem. Those other people are because I did x, y, and z to learn my craft and they didn't because they're dumb." is a good usage of our time and effort. I disagree. I think it's counterproductive. I think it wastes our time, and I think it pushes away new authors and even established authors who don't want to deal with this behavior anymore. We all know that educating authors will lead to better books. No one's arguing that keeping authors ignorant is good for our brands as independent authors. No one's arguing that not editing is good for an author. We've all said these things before. Hell, I've made blog posts about this. What I am saying is that these generic bashing threads are useless to educating authors. They only isolate and alienate. We should be able to come up with a better solution.


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

Interstitial time. Time out for a smile.


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

The interstitial has ended. You may now carry on:


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

This link may be relevant to this discussion - an article about quality in publishing. Not so much all the stuff about traditional publishing, but about credentials, training etc - how to achieve quality:

http://kriswrites.com/2012/03/21/the-business-rusch-quality/


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2012)

swolf said:


> The problem is, 'every resource available at my disposal' is a vague phrase. I have thousands of dollars in the bank. Should I be spending thousands on the best editor available to produce something worth buying? And if I don't, am I shortchanging my readers? Some on here seem to be making that claim. After all, if I don't spend all my money, I'm not using every resource at my disposal.


If you _make a decision_ to read that extreme position into what I wrote, particularly in light of the entirety of the rest of the post, are you really any better than the people who claim expect it to be done their way or it is wrong? If we take an all-or-nothing attitude on either side, in the end it is the readers who suffer.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Rex,

The fact that you're restricting me to credible sources tells me you already concede that the sentiments I mentioned exist. But I'll give you two examples from this thread.



PAWilson said:


> ...maybe if the traditionally published books which are edited had no errors, I'd see the value.


The implication is clear: editors are worthless (or nearly so) because traditionally published books have mistakes in them. Right after this Lee Lopez says editors are "untrustworthy."



Rex Jameson said:


> We're supposed to be showing instead of telling, but what we mostly do in these threads is tell other people that they're idiots for not using editors. I think we can and should do better than this. I'm an engineer. When someone comes to me and says "we have a problem", I offer solutions. I don't complain about who I feel is the source of the problem. I may offer an analysis of where the problem starts so that we might come to a better solution, but I don't just complain, mock, and insult when someone mentions a big problem.


Well, who asked for a solution and didn't get one? I see people posting threads about their blurbs, covers and books all the time. I see them getting thoughtful answers all the time. There were lots of solutions offered here too.

But I also see a lot of threads where people aren't really looking for help; they want from writers the validation they couldn't get (or didn't get enough of) from readers. And even when they get carefully padded criticism instead of unabashed sympathy, they get their backs up and start throwing around the usual conspiratorial boilerplate. It's only natural that writers who tried to help will blow off steam about "anti-editing" every now and again.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

This is a new industry. Nobody is an expert, because nobody _can_ be one (yet). There is a vague resemblance to traditional publishing, but in the end it is an altogether different animal. Previous experience may provide some hints. Some of those may be useful, or not. YMMV.

This is the Internet. People are going to publish whatever they like, in whatever quality they deem acceptable. There is no way to prevent that and neither should there be. The market will decide whether their product is viable.

Caveat emptor.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> The implication is clear: editors are worthless (or nearly so) because traditionally published books have mistakes in them. Right after this Lee Lopez says editors are "untrustworthy."


So what? Someone thinks editors are worthless. Are editors looking for validation?


----------



## glennlangohr (Nov 15, 2011)

Editing used to drive me crazy. Either my writing has progressed, or I'm less anal about it. I think the positive reviews and fellow proof readers are enough for me. Now formatting is a whole nother issue.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

WHDean said:


> Rex,
> 
> The fact that you're restricting me to credible sources tells me you already concede that the sentiments I mentioned exist. But I'll give you two examples from this thread.
> 
> ...


No, I'm saying that there are authors out there who are literally doing EVERYTHING wrong, and some of you are using them as an impetus to spew nonsense. And that making it into an anti-editing versus editing grouping is not adding anything to our community. You're essentially making a big deal about nothing, whereas I'm saying that the attitudes in threads like these are causing less authors to interact in our Writer's Cafe community.

To be perfectly frank, you don't know what you're talking about. My inbox has messages from many new authors (and established authors who have sold more than I have) who feel that they have been targeted by these threads and these attitudes, and what I'm telling you and others here is that you guys don't realize the effect you're having on PEOPLE WHO YOU ARE PROBABLY NOT ACTUALLY TRYING TO TARGET.

Also, for others reading this thread, W H Dean offers editing services to self publishers. Perhaps he thinks that insulting these new authors (and myself) works into his favor because those authors will feel guilted or whatever into using his services. However, fostering an environment where we show the benefits of using an editor instead of telling all authors they're retarded for not using editors will probably result in better results. It's a "you attract more bees with honey" type thing. The bad authors who refuse to grow or utilize editing services of any kind are very unlikely to establish core audiences.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> Also, for others reading this thread, W H Dean offers editing services to self publishers. Perhaps he thinks that insulting these new authors (and myself) works into his favor because those authors will feel guilted or whatever into using his services. However, fostering an environment where we show the benefits of using an editor instead of telling all authors they're retarded for not using editors will probably result in better results. It's a "you attract more bees with honey" type thing. The bad authors who refuse to grow or utilize editing services of any kind are very unlikely to establish core audiences.


I'm a little surprised you'd go there, Rex. But I guess when one is on the side of the angels, anything is fair ball.

I do have some good news for you. In case you haven't noticed, I stopped commenting on anything related to blurbs, covers and bad reviews a while back because of comments like yours. I've also stopped contributing to _Why is my book not selling? _ after some reflection. Contrary to your claim, it's not like I get much out of it but exercise, which I can easily get elsewhere.

Now, here's your win: I'm going to stop commenting on editing too. I don't care how anodyne the question seems or how bad the poster seems to want an answer; I'm just going to ignore it. You can answer it; and you'll be able to say whatever you want without any concern that I'll interject and crush the tender shoots or whatever it is that I'm alleged to have done.

Unfortunately, I won't be going away (or saying what you want me to say). No dice there. I'm just going to stick my to own and other threads. Can't say I'll do my best to please you, but I'm sure you'll let me know when I need to be censored there as well.

So congratulations on your victory. It's a minor one to be sure, but you are getting what you want.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

WHDean said:


> I'm a little surprised you'd go there, Rex. But I guess when one is on the side of the angels, anything is fair ball.
> 
> I do have some good news for you. In case you haven't noticed, I stopped commenting on anything related to blurbs, covers and bad reviews a while back because of comments like yours. I've also stopped contributing to _Why is my book not selling? _ after some reflection. Contrary to your claim, it's not like I get much out of it but exercise, which I can easily get elsewhere.
> 
> ...


You're surprised I would go there? That's funny. Because let's look at who you put in the anti-editing camp and how you did it.

You quoted PA Wilson as anti-editing when she was saying that she uses critique circles and proofreaders but doesn't pay for professional editors. Here's the actual quote that you intentionally skewed:



> You know if editing was affordable, maybe I'd pay for it. But, then again, maybe if the traditionally published books which are edited had no errors, I'd see the value.
> 
> I get critiques and proofreading, but not editing.


It sounds like you're misreading her. She gets feedback from a critique group, which btw are often nowhere near as nice as professional editors are and if she's found a good group, I'm betting they tell her how it is and don't hold back.

And Lee Lopez said:



> I'm both for and against using a 'editor'. I have a editor, but she's not a professional editor. But has a strong English background and is published. Professional editors are very expensive and I find untrustworthy in my opinion. I also rely on a circle of beta readers or proofreaders, they are my strongest editing point. They fine tune the story.


The person who Lee uses has a strong English background and is published. He also says he uses beta readers and proofreaders. This is a multi-pass process. Lee probably has experience paying hundreds or even thousands of dollars for "professional" services that did not work out. This happens a lot, but we often don't talk about it as much because we authors feel like idiots for being taken to the cleaners by trying editing services without a proper list of previous clients, success stories, and recommendations.

Amanda Hocking, for instance, paid for multiple professional editors on her independently published books, and she had reason to be disappointed with their services. When we did the Pink Snowbunnies in Hell Anthology, Debora Geary paid for editing and she didn't get her money's worth. She had to hire a different professional for a simple anthology of flash fiction!! Many of us have had these issues. We search and search for a quality editor, and many here haven't found one within their price range. It doesn't make them anti-editing. At least, I don't think Brian meant to include them in the above category.

If you need to play martyr, go for it. If you want to self-impose an exile in other threads, more power to you. But your beef shouldn't be with me. You made this about me versus you with your first attack using a rather silly list and then a second attack involving your twisting of others' words out of context in quotes to suit your own purposes and attempt to label those persons anti-editing. Quite frankly, I should be in your potential client list and not in your angry target list, as I'm the type of author who has historically paid thousands for editing services. Then again, I couldn't find your client list or success stories on your site, so in actuality, there's no way I'd be on your potential client list. As others have said, many of us have experience paying for editors without client lists and example work, and for the prices you charge for even proofreading, it would be extremely difficult for me to take a chance on you. It doesn't mean I'm anti-editing. I'm extremely pro third-party reviews of my work, with paid editors or unpaid means. Again, I'm not saying you would take me for a ride, but without any kind of client list or example clients on your website, it would be hard for people like me or Lopez or Wilson to give you a shot with our money.

Just as there are terrible authors out there, there are bad editors out there, and many of us have experience with this latter issue. The problem is it sours some authors indefinitely on the process. The best we can do as a community is point new authors to the good sources of editing. Of course, that has a whole other problem--overloading. These recommendations tend to overload the author list of great editors and cause backups, delays, and raises in pricing from the editor as they perceive the obvious consequences of supply and demand. I don't have an answer to that except to find more great editors !


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

WHDean said:


> I'm a little surprised you'd go there, Rex. But I guess when one is on the side of the angels, anything is fair ball.
> 
> I do have some good news for you. In case you haven't noticed, I stopped commenting on anything related to blurbs, covers and bad reviews a while back because of comments like yours. I've also stopped contributing to _Why is my book not selling? _ after some reflection. Contrary to your claim, it's not like I get much out of it but exercise, which I can easily get elsewhere.
> 
> ...


I hope that you don't leave and stop helping people around here. I'm also surprised that you're surprised that Rex would go anywhere that he's gone here. We've been way over the line for quite some time. (And that's why I haven't read any more of his posts here.)

I'll take a look at whatever Rex says in reply to this. I've gone through his profile up to the #300th most recent post (1/3rd of his activity here). I've looked for examples of "leading writers to the light", helping them with editing or craft, or helping with critical feedback on writing. Here's the results.

Of the 300 most recent posts that Rex has made (sorry, don't have time to go through all of them), I found that he's responded to a writing craft thread 3 times with feedback. Here are the examples:



> I found about writing craft (sort of):
> 
> #175
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,104115.msg1582475.html#msg1582475
> ...


Some of these are simply cases where writing was discussed and he gave his personal preference with the issue at hand. So, I gave him the benefit of the doubt there.

Also found this one:



> How is this guiding the misinformed to the light?
> 
> #168
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,104271.msg1584370.html#msg1584370


Apparently, Rex isn't beyond insulting other authors. And, in case he edits his post out, here's what it says:



> Quote from: Bards and Sages (Julie) on February 18, 2012, 08:28:17 PM
> 
> 
> > The real danger comes from going to the trouble to set up two sockpuppet accounts and leave almost identical 5 star reviews on your book, and someone notices.
> ...


So, Julie says the guy has faked his two reviews, and Rex agrees. Instead of "guiding him to the light" as Rex recommends, Rex puts him down some more.

Wouldn't the appropriate response be, "If you wrote those reviews, you should take them down, man. I'm just trying to help, friend!"

Or, do we only let things slide when we're talking about editing? Or do we only let things slide when we're talking about certain authors?

Where did I find the most recent craft post by WH Dean? His 29th most recent post.

Where is my most recent craft post? #5: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,108681.msg1635515.html#msg1635515

The above issue was discussed in private with the author by email. She didn't indicate whether she wanted to talk in private or public in the email, so I did it in private. Gave her some tips about her dialogue problems (as did others).

The time before that? #15:
http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,108542.msg1634042.html#msg1634042

The OP wanted help with writing titles in the narrative. Helped him, and he got on with his writing. Did I say, "OMG YOU MUST HIRE AN EDITOR NOOB!" No, I helped him.

Before that? #47: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,107943.msg1627246.html#msg1627246

The OP was requesting help with capitalization rules for paranormal races in the narrative. Several others had gotten to him first, but I wanted to add in a little input to the problem. It might have helped others.

The point is, if you want to stand as a beacon of light to the struggling authors of the world, do more than talk about being a beacon of light to the struggling authors of the world. Actually BE a beacon of light to the struggling authors of the world. Help them. Don't just talk about helping them.

People pop up all the time asking for help. Why can't I find more than 3 topics in 300 where Rex has helped anyone? Is this all a ruse just to bicker with the rest of us?


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

If you can spend some money to catch typos and obvious mistakes I think it's worthwhile because that's what readers tend to focus on. I am not really convinced that paying for editing to improve the writing results in improved sales.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> I hope that you don't leave and stop helping people around here. I'm also surprised that you're surprised that Rex would go anywhere that he's gone here. We've been way over the line for quite some time. (And that's why I haven't read any more of his posts here.)
> 
> I'll take a look at whatever Rex says in reply to this. I've gone through his profile up to the #300th most recent post (1/3rd of his activity here). I've looked for examples of "leading writers to the light", helping them with editing or craft, or helping with critical feedback on writing. Here's the results.
> 
> ...


I don't expect the few people I am helping through emails at this very moment to respond to this thread. I have responded to people in the cover art review blog. I have personally done proofreading for dozens of authors. I generally respond in private to people through my mailbox on these forums, which I've had to clear out multiple times because there is a messaging limit. I also interact with people on Facebook, despite defending my dissertation proposal last semester and my dissertation tomorrow, and publishing four books in the inter-meaning time and traveling across the country for job talks, interviews, conferences, etc. I do what I can, and I hope to God I'm not accidentally misleading authors who come to me.

But the truth is that I am still learning what to do myself. I am not the perfect writer. I'm probably not even a good writer, but what I am tired of is finding authors who won't come back to Kindleboards because of the attitude here.

At least I now know that you really were targeting everyone who couldn't afford an editor. At first, I thought you really didn't mean to.

P.S. In a moment, I'll respond to your individual quotes of my posts. I only clicked on one, and it's out of context. I'll help you out momentarily.

Edit: Actually, you only point out one that shows me as a big bad meanie, so I guess I only have to respond to that:



> How is this guiding the misinformed to the light?
> 
> #168
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,104271.msg1584370.html#msg1584370


This author had left something like 3-10 different 5 star reviews for himself at the time. I was specifically stating that I almost didn't respond to his post at all after seeing that he seemed to be intentionally misleading readers with his reviews. If that makes me a bad guy for stating that I noticed this guy's tactics, then so be it.

As for my other 300 posts, I've tried to be constructive at times, funny at others, and generally go with the flow. On my writing blog, I specifically try to share the problems I've faced, the stupid decisions I've made, and the benefits of certain things I've tried. So to me, I've tried to contribute to community that helped foster me, and I've contributed to craft threads, but they always roll off the front page and get lost which is tough to stomach some times with limited time available.

I would never claim that you don't help others on the forums. In truth, I honestly like you. I think you're angry with me, and I accept that. You and I weren't strong friends before, and we may never talk to each other again (at least from your side). No worries. You didn't need my help/counsel/friendship any way.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> At least I now know that you really were targeting everyone who couldn't afford an editor. At first, I thought you really didn't mean to.


No need to reply any further. This tells me that we no longer need to discuss this topic because it's doing no good at all. Just save the time.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> No need to reply any further. This tells me that we no longer need to discuss this topic because it's doing no good at all. Just save the time.


Sorry, I was editing my post instead of double posting. What I meant to say in this is that you seem to be backing someone who is saying that two posters in this thread are anti-editing because they use critique groups instead of professional editors. If that's your feeling, and you feel kinship with Dean, then there truly is very little you or I should say to each other--if you feel this is actually a useful position to have on these forums in the first place.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> Sorry, I was editing my post instead of double posting. What I meant to say in this is that you seem to be backing someone who is saying that two posters in this thread are anti-editing because they use critique groups instead of professional editors. If that's your feeling, and you feel kinship with Dean, then there truly is very little you or I should say to each other--if you feel this is actually a useful position to have on these forums in the first place.


My original words were:


> I hope that you don't leave and stop helping people around here.


Like you, I wouldn't want anyone to go away and stop helping people because of this argument. I didn't say, "I 100% support everything Dean has done in the past, present, and future, and furthermore endorse all of his advice past, present, and future as solid-gold bricks that we should worship."

In fact, I haven't read every single one of Dean's posts. I haven't read every single one of your posts. Or Julie's. Or Krista's. Or Dalglish's. Or anyone's. The intent was to keep someone who is content to help others from stopping the practice.

The recent posts I've seen Dean make about editing, he's helped the people. He didn't say, "Yes, you have a problem, but if you'll check my website, you can hire me." He just helped them.

I understand that you've helped people in private, but the chief issue you're taking with everyone here is that we're not helping people of this board. We're making the board unbearable for everyone who doesn't pay for editing. That's simply not true. According to the above examples, several of us "pro-editing" folks are helping much more than you are when people ask questions on this forum. I help people in private all the time, too, but you're talking about this board specifically, so let's talk about this board specifically.

To every post I've personally made, I could have said, "You need to hire an editor. We cannot help you unless you pay someone to help you." But, I would have been the person that you're trying to make me out to be. On the contrary, I haven't done that. If I see a thread with a question, I try to answer it as best as I can for their benefit. Sometimes I'm right and sometimes I'm wrong. I'm not the best in the world, either, but I try to help when I see someone needing help.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> My original words were:
> Like you, I wouldn't want anyone to go away and stop helping people because of this argument. I didn't say, "I 100% support everything Dean has done in the past, present, and future, and furthermore endorse all of his advice past, present, and future as solid-gold bricks that we should worship."
> 
> In fact, I haven't read every single one of Dean's posts. I haven't read every single one of your posts. Or Julie's. Or Krista's. Or Dalglish's. Or anyone's. The intent was to keep someone who is content to help others from stopping the practice.
> ...


First, I apologize that I gave you that impression. I think you're a good man. I also think Dean is a good man. I just think that Kindleboards can resemble a mob at times and people seem to let things go that cause others a lot of undue anguish here.

You've never previously said "You need to hire an editor." I'd never heard you ever say that, and then you started this thread, and I admit I just went "No... no, Brian, not you too!" Like I said, I think you're a good man. I have followed your story because I respect you--not because it was something I ever expected to have to bring up in this situation. For the most part, I think you and I are talking at each other instead of listening to each other, and I accept that I am probably contributing to that.

So, again, I apologize.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> First, I apologize that I gave you that impression. I think you're a good man. I also think Dean is a good man. I just think that Kindleboards can resemble a mob at times and people seem to let things go that cause others a lot of undue anguish here.
> 
> You've never previously said "You need to hire an editor." I'd never heard you ever say that, and then you started this thread, and I admit I just went "No... no, Brian, not you too!" Like I said, I think you're a good man. I have followed your story because I respect you--not because it was something I ever expected to have to bring up in this situation. For the most part, I think you and I are talking at each other instead of listening to each other, and I accept that I am probably contributing to that.
> 
> So, again, I apologize.


Well, I'll say that I apologize if I said anything hurtful to you. No, I'll say that anything with any snark or snide in it that I knowingly said, I'm sorry if it hurt you at all.

A post that was initially created in jest has become far too aggressive, far too "out there", for lack of a better term.

Here's what I'll say. The order of "best benefit to worst benefit" of what I'd recommend anyone starting out to do is this:

(Best benefit)
- Hire a pro if you can afford it. If you're close to affording it, try to save up a bit more before proceeding. On the same note, please, dear God above, check out the editor and make sure you're not throwing money in a fire pit. Just as there are many who get paid and do a terrific, wonderful, amazing editing job, there are so many more who will take the money and run.

- If you can't afford a pro (and have little hope of getting one any time soon), get someone who isn't a friend/family and who has some experience with books. Someone who is willing to look at your work with a critical eye and make the hard recommendations. (This is what I did originally. It didn't work out for me, but it was the best that I could do at the time. Lots of people liked my early books under this method, and lots didn't. Likewise, many authors here have said it HAS worked for them. I don't doubt that it can work, but it takes special, strong people to work great.) This stage is represented by someone skilled in English (and, preferably fiction and style), other writers in critique circles or for-barter relationships (you edit mine, I'll edit yours), and so forth. People on this board are probably at this level on singular questions, but not for the manuscript in its entirety (at least, in public).

- Have *someone, anyone* look it over prior to publication. The MS will probably still have issues, but it will be better than going it 100% alone. (This is casual editing by friends/family. They probably won't give you all the feedback, and it probably won't be with a critical eye. If it's the first draft and they say, "Loved it!", try to get some more feedback.)

- Do it 100% on your own, no feedback from anyone else. This will probably result in a lot of heart ache for those who care about putting out good work. It's EXTREMELY hard to be objective about your own writing; you'll catch plenty of problems, but an outside perspective can do wonders for catching issues.
(Worst benefit)

The above is more or less the "four degrees" of editing that one might experience. There are plenty of in-between situations, but this is basically the "individual stages", so to speak and how I feel about each one. From what I've seen of the forums, most can generally agree about this as presented. Some will say that you must always follow option #1, some will say option #2 and #1 are okay under the right circumstances. Some will say #3 is okay, and a few will say #4 is just fine.

I would say #1 is the best possibility, while #2 can be done with the right setup/the right people. It didn't work for me (and I had great people, just not experienced with commercial fiction), but it has for others. As you go down the list, I think you'll find less and less people on average recommending each successive option as being okay, the bottom tier being the least preferred. And, I also apologize for not being a bit more clear in the original topic, but the last option would be the one I'd say applied here, only a little more extreme: the folks who would say that option #1 is a terrible idea in any way, that editing shouldn't be paid for. Again, that's a rare thing to see (maybe a handful of passersby have said such). The OP was in pondering why we hadn't seen any pop up in the pro-paid-editing threads lately, and it was merely for amusement (yet it provoked all this badness).


----------



## Guest (Mar 26, 2012)

Back in the day, when I was a moderator at lulu.com, we had a great group of very helpful people who offered advice on cover design, editing, marketing and everything else.  Many of them offered editing for free to help other authors.  The "old guys" would give detailed feedback on excerpts whenever someone posted a "plz critique my story" thread.  People were blunt and direct, but instructive.  They wanted to help.  They did.

But over time, the "be supportive and don't scare away the newbies" crowd started to shout down the people who had been helping from day one.  You couldn't tell someone they had grammar problems anymore.  You couldn't tell someone they had to clean up their spelling.  You couldn't point out plot holes.  You couldn't do anything that could potentially be interpreted as being even a hint of mean, because we might scare the newbies away.  

Eventually, one by one.  They people with the experience and knowledge stopped offering help.  They stopped posting at all. And all of the newbies were left with a fluffy bunny land where they never had to worry about anyone hurting their feelings.

Until, of course, they got their first one-star review telling them how much their book needed an editor.  

Then, they would run back to the forum crying about how mean the reviewer was, and everybody would huddle together and tell them to ignore the mean people and keep following their dreams.

I can't help but think some of the recent threads with the accusation of "scaring off" readers is a sign that KB is heading in that direction.  I would hate for people with genuine knowledge and desire to share it be shouted down simply because we might be worried someone, somewhere, is too thinned skinned to read a forum post about editing and not take it as a personal insult on their honor.

I know I certainly do not post here to benefit thin-skinned people who only want to wrap themselves in happy thoughts and have everything handed to them.  I post here for people who want to improve their craft.  You don't create diamonds by rubbing them with a soft cloth.  You create diamonds by applying pressure and heat.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

I whole-heartedly agree with these "four degrees."

And I completely knew your OP was meant in jest. My statements were more a mark of concern that we, as a group, don't seem to realize that many people are being lumped into "anti-editing" that really shouldn't be, and they are taking it very, very personally.

Dean's comments put this in stark relief. To him, as an editor, he believes "anti-editing" includes anyone using the three later degrees you talk about exclusively and not using the first one (either by choice or due to lack of funds). Dean is by no means alone, and again, he's not a bad guy for thinking this way. As I said before, he's a little bit biased in this, but not in a bad way. Dean probably puts everything he has into editing his clients. His livelihood probably depends on everything he makes from editing. He believes that not going with him or someone like him is crazy, because he will do everything in his power to make your work better (if you bring your work to him). I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt here because I know my editing team puts everything they have into making my products as good as they can--like it was their own work.

The problem is that I would venture a good fourth of us have had bad editors, and few of us probably understand just how awesome having a good editor can be. Part of me thinks I should post the before and after of Lucifer's Odyssey, but the smarter part of me tells me "under no circumstances should you post the monstrosity that used to be." In truth, it's embarrassing.

I often use a particular humorous video in response to someone who asks me if they need editing. The answer is almost always yes, and the video explains why.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Back in the day, when I was a moderator at lulu.com, we had a great group of very helpful people who offered advice on cover design, editing, marketing and everything else. Many of them offered editing for free to help other authors. The "old guys" would give detailed feedback on excerpts whenever someone posted a "plz critique my story" thread. People were blunt and direct, but instructive. They wanted to help. They did.
> 
> But over time, the "be supportive and don't scare away the newbies" crowd started to shout down the people who had been helping from day one. You couldn't tell someone they had grammar problems anymore. You couldn't tell someone they had to clean up their spelling. You couldn't point out plot holes. You couldn't do anything that could potentially be interpreted as being even a hint of mean, because we might scare the newbies away.
> 
> ...


My intent is not to foster that kind of environment. I probably appreciate your Sith Queen ways just as much as anyone. What I'm not a fan of is lumping a lot of people into anti-editing that shouldn't be there and then starting a bunch of threads that bash 1) indies in general or 2) a whole group of authors that could include all new authors for no apparent constructive reason whatsoever.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> I whole-heartedly agree with these "four degrees."
> 
> And I completely knew your OP was meant in jest. My statements were more a mark of concern that we, as a group, don't seem to realize that many people are being lumped into "anti-editing" that really shouldn't be, and they are taking it very, very personally.
> 
> ...


I'll have to watch the video later (work firewall), but I will. Is it the one with the animated characters? If so, I've seen that. (I think it's a bear and a frog with computer generated voices.) If it's not and you haven't seen that one yet, I'll seek out the link when I get on a free computer.

I don't know, I can't really speak for Dean. I'm sure that he puts his whole heart into his work, though. If he has clients who also use KB, we would have heard about shoddy work by now, I'm sure.

I haven't had a bad editor, really. In my particular situation, I had good editors with strong English skills, but they had no experience in producing mainstream, commercial work. One of my folks had worked in doing congressional correspondence, so they probably would have been great at non-fiction stuff (and I may ask them to be at least an alpha reader on some non-fiction if I ever get around to writing the stuff). My volunteer proofers? Wonderful. In my situation, I needed to work on the story and make it more "normal", more in line with what people usually expect in fiction these days. In retrospect, many of the more moderate (still negative, just not seething with hate, lol) reviews generally said that the story was good, but the execution wasn't. The problem with that feedback was the fact that I didn't know what about the execution was bad. I decided to hire someone--someone with strong book experience, strong editing skills--who could look at my writing with a critical eye and tell me what I was doing wrong.

I say, if you have someone who can serve in that capacity (and you're not lying to yourself about their objectivity), use them. It's not a crime to not pay for editing, but it's a crime not to do anything at all. And although I recommend paid editing for a number of reasons, similar results can be achieved without money crossing the table when the right people are involved. I don't think many here would disagree with that.

As an aside, the best things I found about a paid editor are:
- The dedication to the project. They'll hang with you start to finish, and they're just as interested in getting it done in a timely manner as you are. (More jobs backing up, etc.)
- You don't know them from Adam. Feedback is totally honest, brute, frank.
- Top-notch skills. They have to know what they're doing if they're reputable because they might have to refund the money if they're not doing a good job.

Lots more, but those are just the ones off the top of my head. And if you can (really, truly, honestly) get all of that in non-paid agreements, go for it. Just make sure you're being honest with yourself about the process and what you're doing.

Also, I had forgotten to mention earlier: if you're considering paid editing and you think you can't afford it, at least get a quote off of a few people. The prices aren't always extremely high, and you may find a quality editor to work with for the right price.

Oh, and to the mods: thank you for not locking the thread and allowing us to continue despite getting nasty in some bits. This thread got ugly before it got better, and it's been uglier than some others that have been locked fast. I'm not recommending a policy change or anything like that. I'm just saying thanks for letting us work this one out.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Heh, yeah. Thanks, mods !

The video is from a couple of brothers who blog to each other throughout the week and have been doing so for years. One of them is a writer, and in this video, he's talking about some random stuff for a minute, and then he talks about his editor getting back to him on his latest book. He jokes about what people think editors actually do, and how important they really are to his fiction. In one of his examples, he mentions how one of his books would have had dozens of pages about skinning and tanning raccoon hides instead of being the much better book that his readers enjoyed. He also jokes about how his editor catches him claiming that every day of the book is Friday, and that in many classic books, an editor has made a huge difference in the books becoming beloved books.

Back in August of 2011, Moses Siregar and I talked about paid editing. He's one of those that doesn't really come here as much anymore. Anyway, we've both spent a large sum of money editing our first books, and one of the things we both enjoyed about working with paid editors on our first books is how much it prepares us for the next books. Basically, by working with content developers for at least one book (or in Moses's case, with a copy editor with story notes), you start asking yourself the kinds of questions that an editor would ask during the writing of a second book. You may find that you have less doubts about the content of your story because the voice of your content editor sticks with you. I've noted several times here and on my blog that a content editor is an investment in an author's future. Even using a content editor one time will probably have a profound impact on how you write your future books.

In other words, in my experience, a content editor improved not only my current book's story, but since I paid close attention, it also greatly contributed to my other three books. The other three books were copy edits. I didn't have to go full price for the content edit, but I have residual effects, imo, from the education I gained from working with a content editor.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> " It's not a crime to not pay for editing, but it's a crime not to do anything at all. "


The production process of any author is none of our business. We have no standing to pronounce on it. All we have is the final product. The final product is fair game. If we don't like the production process the author uses, tough.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> The production process of any author is none of our business. We have no standing to pronounce on it. All we have is the final product. The final product is fair game. If we don't like the process the author uses, tough.


Ok. What would you recommend people do?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "Ok. What would you recommend people do?"


I don't. An author's production process is none of my business.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> Ok. What would you recommend people do?


To touch on my own perspective on this, I feel it would benefit more authors if we discussed our process and what we felt it gained us. Specific examples will help. What tangible things did we notice from our approach? In this way, authors can see what they're missing from their own writing process. They may even be able to go to a friend or someone in their critique group and say "Listen, I can't afford a content editor, but read this article real quick and see what the content editors generally ask during the process. Can you try doing that for me as best you can? Just be honest, and if you have a question about why I did something, ask it." It may result in a completely different editing process, and may even be more rewarding for all involved.

If a critique group or a group of friends/family know exactly what types of questions the author is really asking for, they will probably see positive reinforcement from the author and happiness with the quality of the critique. They may be more willing to give more thorough analyses. So, I think this goes with your comments on authors needing to educate themselves constantly.

In my case, one thing that working with editors has taught me is to write more deliberately. What effect did this have on my writing process?

When I first started, I was 100% a pantser. I would start writing, let the characters do something, and feel it out. The problem with writing this way is that it often results in void pockets in the story. What do I mean by void pockets? I mean that characters would be fleshed out in drawn out ways that didn't necessarily move the story forward but may have helped me personally understand the characters or setting better. This may actually bore a reader by slowing down the pacing.

Now, I've switched to keeping an outline of what the entire story or even trilogy might be. I know the major plot points beforehand, and I let them guide me into the more pants-like process of connecting the general outline. I've noticed this resulted in a more coherent storyline. In fact, my comments from my editor on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th book were glowing. We had to rewrite the 1st book together from scratch to fix the problems I had. Granted, this wasn't my first rewrite, and I went in expecting to get that advice, so I went with it. The next books had no such suggestion for a rewrite. There were two places in The Goblin Rebellion where he thought it may be clearer for the chapters to be chopped up and included, but this was an experiment based on reader feedback from not only my first book but also the reviews from other books I had read that tried to do something similar. So, another thing I learned is that it's OK to disagree with an editor--just be prepared to accept the consequences. After all, it's your book, and the editor's job is to help you make it the best it can be.

My advice would be: Trust your instincts, trust your paid professionals and unpaid readers, and try not to get stuck in a rut of stubbornness. I hope I always continue to learn and grow as an author, and part of growing is being willing to admit you were wrong and learning from that.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Another thanks to the mods for letting this one play out. It's led to a really interesting discussion despite looking like it was on an inevitable crash course with the padlocks.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Passionate discussion is fine, but personal attacks are not.  I didn't see anything that truly crossed the line into personal attacks.  (Or maybe I missed them).  The discussion, for the largest part, stayed about issues, not name calling, not addressing things that happened off site.

And so the thread stayed open.  No thanks needed.  Y'all did it.

Betsy


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

I think most filtering happens when potential readers see the cover, then read the blurb. If they're still interested they look at reviews or pop the book open. If it still interests them, they order.

According to several studies, most decisions are made from recommendations, word-of-mouth. For that, you have to have written a book that mavens and influencers like.

Authors either grow, or their sales drop. Long tail, they'll drop anyway. So authors write new books. Those who are interested in learning will get better. Those who thought it was a great get-rich-quick scheme will most likely stop writing.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

So no lock?

Darn, and I was picking out a new In-Under-The-Lock JPG and everything...










I guess brotherly love trumps all.

B.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I don't. An author's production process is none of my business.


No, what I'm saying is:

Hi, Terrence. I'm a new author, and I just finished writing my book. To you, what's the next step?


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> To touch on my own perspective on this, I feel it would benefit more authors if we discussed our process and what we felt it gained us. Specific examples will help. What tangible things did we notice from our approach? In this way, authors can see what they're missing from their own writing process. They may even be able to go to a friend or someone in their critique group and say "Listen, I can't afford a content editor, but read this article real quick and see what the content editors generally ask during the process. Can you try doing that for me as best you can? Just be honest, and if you have a question about why I did something, ask it." It may result in a completely different editing process, and may even be more rewarding for all involved.
> 
> If a critique group or a group of friends/family know exactly what types of questions the author is really asking for, they will probably see positive reinforcement from the author and happiness with the quality of the critique. They may be more willing to give more thorough analyses. So, I think this goes with your comments on authors needing to educate themselves constantly.
> 
> ...


+1, and I'll add to the last piece of advice, especially the last sentence. It's a phrase that applies to my real-world job, but it can be twisted and turned to fit really anything: if you feel like you know it all and have nothing left to learn, it won't be long before you get someone killed.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Hi, Terrence. I'm a new author, and I just finished writing my book. To you, what's the next step?


I don't know. I don't know the author, the state of his product, his experience, capabilities, talents, resources, motivations, objectives, or constraints. I could no more tell him what to do than I could recommend a production process for a company I knew nothing about.

Since I recognize huge differences among individual authors, and since a successful production process has to be tailored to the individual producer, I would consider it malpractice to give a recommendation with such ignorance about the individual.

The folly would be further compounded by the presumption that I have qualifications or experience to advise anyone.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> So no lock?
> 
> I guess brotherly love trumps all.
> 
> B.





Betsy the Quilter said:


> Passionate discussion is fine, but personal attacks are not. I didn't see anything that truly crossed the line into personal attacks. (Or maybe I missed them). The discussion, for the largest part, stayed about issues, not name calling, not addressing things that happened off site.
> 
> And so the thread stayed open. No thanks needed. Y'all did it.
> 
> Betsy





Edward W. Robertson said:


> Another thanks to the mods for letting this one play out. It's led to a really interesting discussion despite looking like it was on an inevitable crash course with the padlocks.


Brotherly love won out? I think not. What happened was much less edifying than that: the person willing to make everything personal, insult his perceived enemies, and don the cloak of protector of the oppressed to shout down all opposition succeeded (as they always do). Does it really surprise any of you that he calmed down once he was freely able to impose his view of me and editing on the thread? Wasn't the real reason the "crash course" was avoided that I let him say what he wanted unopposed?

Anyway, you'll continue to see the results of this. I can tell that there are already a lot of people on this board who know far more than they let on. But they keep quiet because they don't want flack. I'm joining their ranks. That leaves-by my count-about four or five people who are willing to argue or critique something, and Julie is the only one who does it regularly. Maybe you should consider being more supportive of them before they quit too.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Until, of course, they got their first one-star review telling them how much their book needed an editor.


My feeling is if a writer is going to merit one-star reviews because he or she didn't use an editor, that writer doesn't really need an editor. That writer needs a lot more practice and, frankly, may simply not have much talent for writing.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

WHDean said:


> Brotherly love won out? I think not. What happened was much less edifying than that: the person willing to make everything personal, insult his perceived enemies, and don the cloak of protector of the oppressed to shout down all opposition succeeded (as they always do). Does it really surprise any of you that he calmed down once he was freely able to impose his view of me and editing on the thread? Wasn't the real reason the "crash course" was avoided that I let him say what he wanted unopposed?
> 
> Anyway, you'll continue to see the results of this. I can tell that there are already a lot of people on this board who know far more than they let on. But they keep quiet because they don't want flack. I'm joining their ranks. That leaves-by my count-about four or five people who are willing to argue or critique something, and Julie is the only one who does it regularly. Maybe you should consider being more supportive of them before they quit too.


I've made 1300+ posts in this Writer's Cafe. You've made less than 160. As I said before, regardless of your good intentions, you don't know what you're talking about. You've been here a very short time. Once you've been here for over a year and repeated the same advice over and over again every month for over a year, helped hundreds, and dealt with all the other things that go on here, you'll understand a bit better. As for me not being quite as active (though still very active) in the past few months, the fact of the matter is that I've been working on my dissertation since December when I defended my proposal defense. I have now earned my doctorate as of today, but part of my writing journey (in fact all of my books), have been done in parallel with travel every week or two for job talks, conferences and interviews, writing dozens of conference and journal papers, etc. in my main career. Despite all of that work, I've maintained my fiction blogs for writers and readers, interacted with others here, and helped out dozens of authors with their covers, editing, proofing, etc., on these forums, through Facebook, and however else I'm interacted with. I've made hundreds and hundreds of posts on these forums--sometimes to help writers, sometimes to just have fun and joke around and simply be a part of the community. I have helped many people for free on the Writer's Cafe, and I know that if Brian had thoroughly looked through my most recent 300 posts, he'd find the cover revisions that I have done for people within the past month to try to help them put the best face they can on a book. I shouldn't even have to defend these things to you or anyone. That's just the direction this thread went because you don't have a leg to stand on.

Anyway, no one is trying to squelch you and certainly not me.

If I'm wrong, I apologize. When I push things too far, I apologize. If I don't give someone credit who deserves it, then I apologize. It's as simple as that. But I won't apologize for standing up for a lot of people who feel like they don't have a voice here, and I'm not going to apologize for messaging authors directly and helping them off the forums where I know they'll be more comfortable just because you or anyone else feels I should be totally transparent with my helping of other authors (so you can try to measure me up to you).

_Sigh....edited to comply with Forum Decorum..._


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> The folly would be further compounded by the presumption that I have qualifications or experience to advise anyone.


Didn't you just post this? http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,108850.msg1638016.html#msg1638016


----------



## Gregory Lynn (Aug 9, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> Didn't you just post this? http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,108850.msg1638016.html#msg1638016


If not having the qualifications to advise anyone prevented people from advising one and all, the internet would cease to exist.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "Didn't you just post this?"


Yes. What's your point?


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Yes. What's your point?


I'm just trying to figure out what you mean. You said that you don't have the experience or qualifications to advise anyone, then you post some advice. In other words, I'm completely confused.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Gregory Lynn said:


> If not having the qualifications to advise anyone prevented people from advising one and all, the internet would cease to exist.


LOL


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I'm just trying to figure out what you mean. You said that you don't have the experience or qualifications to advise anyone, then you post some advice. In other words, I'm completely confused.


I have all the qualifications and experience to describe tools I develop and use. That's not a presumption. It's not advice or recommendation to anyone. It's a description of a tool.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I have all the qualifications and experience to describe tools I develop and use. That's not a presumption. It's not advice or recommendation to anyone. It's a description of a tool.


Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying that. It sounded dangerously like you were posting for the benefit of others as to give advice.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying that. It sounded dangerously like you were posting for the benefit of others as to give advice.


Description of a tool may indeed benefit someone. That's not the same as recommending or advising. The tool may be totally inappropriate and counterproductive for people. That's why it isn't advice or recommendation.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Sigh...



Rex Jameson said:


> I've made 1300+ posts in this Writer's Cafe. You've made less than 160.


And I've made over 29,000. And I don't even have the most posts on KB. You know what I call someone with 1300 posts? A newbie.

I've learned stuff on these boards from people with 1 post. Let's please not play the "I've got more posts than you, grasshopper" card...

Betsy


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> I've made 1300+ posts in this Writer's Cafe. You've made less than 160. As I said before, regardless of your good intentions, you don't know what you're talking about. You've been here a very short time. Once you've been here for over a year and repeated the same advice over and over again every month for over a year, helped hundreds, and dealt with all the other things that go on here, you'll understand a bit better. As for me not being quite as active (though still very active) in the past few months, the fact of the matter is that I've been working on my dissertation since December when I defended my proposal defense. I have now earned my doctorate as of today, but part of my writing journey (in fact all of my books), have been done in parallel with travel every week or two for job talks, conferences and interviews, writing dozens of conference and journal papers, etc. in my main career. Despite all of that work, I've maintained my fiction blogs for writers and readers, interacted with others here, and helped out dozens of authors with their covers, editing, proofing, etc., on these forums, through Facebook, and however else I'm interacted with. I've made hundreds and hundreds of posts on these forums--sometimes to help writers, sometimes to just have fun and joke around and simply be a part of the community. I have helped many people for free on the Writer's Cafe, and I know that if Brian had thoroughly looked through my most recent 300 posts, he'd find the cover revisions that I have done for people within the past month to try to help them put the best face they can on a book. I shouldn't even have to defend these things to you or anyone. That's just the direction this thread went because you don't have a leg to stand on.
> 
> Anyway, no one is trying to squelch you and certainly not me.
> 
> ...


First you claimed I was hurting people's feelings and trying to drum up business by making people feel bad about their writing skills. Since I have little interest in debating my character or motivations, and little desire to be perceived as a bully, I announced that I'd shut up about editing altogether. I'll stand by that promise too. Sure, I felt bullied into it because it's ultimately emotional blackmail, but I don't really care that much: I can speak or shut up, stay or go.

Now you're attacking my character because I _won't _ talk about editing; and this while simultaneously telling me I haven't earned my right to speak because I only have 160 posts. Now there's a catch-22: I'm a sulk if I swear off editing-talk, even though I haven't earned the right to talk about it.

Presumably you're assailing my character for quitting the editing-talk because you don't want to be blamed for running anyone off. But maligning me even more hardly speaks to your innocence with regard to resorting to the old ad hominem; and boasting about how you'll stick up for the little guy tells me that my next remark about editing would be met by the same accusations about hurting people's feelings and drumming up business. You could have saved your breath because I got the picture the first time.

Whatever the case, I have no desire to hurt people's feelings or play the villain is someone's psychodrama. If I can't speak frankly about editing without hurting people's feelings-or being accused of it, or being accused of being too new to say anything-I'm just going to shut up about it. The context just isn't conducive to it, end of story. It may only be half a victory for you, because you'd prefer if I said what you want me to say (or wait 2000 posts to say it). But I'm not going to do that, so you'll have to take solace in my silence on the matter.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Sigh...
> 
> And I've made over 29,000. And I don't even have the most posts on KB. You know what I call someone with 1300 posts? A newbie.
> 
> ...


----------



## CaedemMarquez (Mar 23, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> You know what I call someone with 1300 posts? A newbie.


Oh sheesh! If a person who has 1300 posts is a newbie, what does that make me? Sperm?

I was going to walk home, but seeing what I am in the eyes of Betsy, I guess I better get to wiggling.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Caedem, anyone who has saved a drowning friend doesn't need no stinkin' posts...

Betsy


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Yes...that's right, thread...give in to your anger...










B.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Yes...that's right, thread...give in to your anger...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think I love you for that


----------



## R M Rowan (Jul 13, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Yes...that's right, thread...give in to your anger...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That picture will be forever etched in my mind, just like the "Z" word picture! You people have corrupted me!


----------



## CaedemMarquez (Mar 23, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Caedem, anyone who has saved a drowning friend doesn't need no stinkin' posts...
> 
> Betsy


Don't forget the chicken wings! I count that as a far greater accomplishment then saving my bud!

And always remember, my accomplishments make me appear more interesting than I really am.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> If you _make a decision_ to read that extreme position into what I wrote, particularly in light of the entirety of the rest of the post, are you really any better than the people who claim expect it to be done their way or it is wrong? If we take an all-or-nothing attitude on either side, in the end it is the readers who suffer.


What extreme position? There are authors here who have claimed that they've spent thousands of dollars on editing, and it's been suggested they care more about their readers than those who don't spend the money.

And, if one is suporting the logic that a writer who pays $200 for editing cares more about their readers than one who spends nothing, then it follows that one who spends $1000 cares more about their readers than the one who spent $200. And if not, then they have to admit that it's the quality of editing that matters, not how much they spent for it. And if that's the case, the same logic applies if it's self-edited.

Which is my point. It's the final product that matters, not how you got there. Which definitely isn't the attitude around here.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Sigh...
> 
> And I've made over 29,000. And I don't even have the most posts on KB. You know what I call someone with 1300 posts? A newbie.
> 
> ...


Betsy, seriously? When I finally respond to this guy's posts about how I don't contribute anything to these forums, this is your response?

My point was that over time, he'll see how frequently these threads come up. It was not to put a weight on number of posts, but a discussion of time and how watching the forum cliques and attack threads results in a better understanding of how these forums evolve and remove great authors from our ranks. You quoted that portion out of context. You also changed the meaning of at least one of my paragraphs in the post you edited which had previously described his attacks in two posts on these threads. That was not my personal attack. That was his.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

WHDean said:


> First you claimed I was hurting people's feelings and trying to drum up business by making people feel bad about their writing skills. Since I have little interest in debating my character or motivations, and little desire to be perceived as a bully, I announced that I'd shut up about editing altogether. I'll stand by that promise too. Sure, I felt bullied into it because it's ultimately emotional blackmail, but I don't really care that much: I can speak or shut up, stay or go.
> 
> Now you're attacking my character because I _won't _ talk about editing; and this while simultaneously telling me I haven't earned my right to speak because I only have 160 posts. Now there's a catch-22: I'm a sulk if I swear off editing-talk, even though I haven't earned the right to talk about it.
> 
> ...


Ugh.

Listen. This thread wasn't about you. It's still not about you. My issue with lumping everyone who doesn't use content editors into anti-editing is that it alienates the majority of our authors, and I never said that this is only the new authors. We're talking about great authors like Debora Geary who uses critique groups and beta readers. We're talking about Hugh. We're talking about hundreds or even thousands of authors on these forums who are not using content editors because they might not be able to afford it OR they've found wonderful critique groups to help them with story.

Mainly, I'm talking about how I'm sick of watching authors leave these forums that shouldn't, simply because we have these ridiculous rant posts about editing every week. And most of them are so generic that they target the vast majority of everyone.

Do I think that you're probably helping advise on editing as an advertising technique to pick up new authors? Yeah, I think you probably are. Do I think that's a great idea? Yeah, I think that's a pretty great idea. I think that's probably the best way to build trust with potential new clients.

Am I tired of people twisting my words and wearing their heart on their chests? Yes.

And despite the vehemence and claims in your post, I've NEVER told you to shut up. I've never said you don't have valuable input. I've merely said that you don't understand the ebb and flow of these forums and how many great authors refuse to come back here because of frequent attacks from "experts" in who is doing publishing right and who is doing it wrong.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Rex Jameson said:


> We're talking about great authors like Debora Geary who uses critique groups and beta readers.


Like some of the other editors on KB I really hate to even open my mouth in this thread, but I'm pretty sure Deb uses two editors and then has a final pass reading done. I'm not sure if she does paid proofreading after the second edit or not - further discussion of her production process will have to come from her


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Arkali said:


> Like some of the other editors on KB I really hate to even open my mouth in this thread, but I'm pretty sure Deb uses two editors and then has a final pass reading done. I'm not sure if she does paid proofreading after the second edit or not - further discussion of her production process will have to come from her


You may be right about her current process. Her books have done exceedingly well, and she no doubt has the money to do whatever she likes now. I know she has some really excited fans that volunteer in droves to read and give feedback, and she does use them, according to her Facebook posts. Debora is busy, and she's certainly not an author who has mentioned to me that she feels targeted by these threads. She knows that we all value her.

That's not true of everyone.

This has honestly been a long, trying thread. If I'm causing editors to feel they can't open their mouths, I apologize. That wasn't my intent.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Rex Jameson said:


> This has honestly been a long, trying thread. If I'm causing editors to feel they can't open their mouths, I apologize. That wasn't my intent.


Just to clarify, it's not you or this specific thread - I've just seen Lynn and other editors get slammed (in other threads) for "trying to drum up business" or essentially called charlatans, etc. (there have, over the months, been some crappy things said about editors and the need for them). It has made me pretty much stay out of any editing threads, craft threads, etc. Plus, it keeps me from behaving unprofessionally, in much the same way authors warn new writers to never respond to reviews


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Arkali said:


> Just to clarify, it's not you or this specific thread - I've just seen Lynn and other editors get slammed (in other threads) for "trying to drum up business" or essentially called charlatans, etc. (there have, over the months, been some crappy things said about editors and the need for them). It has made me pretty much stay out of any editing threads, craft threads, etc. Plus, it keeps me from behaving unprofessionally, in much the same way authors warn new writers to never respond to reviews


Sorry. As I have said, I've been a bit busy, and I think I may have missed some of the threads that you, Lynn, or maybe Dean have felt targeted in. If someone could email me some references to the worst offenders, I'd really appreciate it. I am by no means trying to make editors' jobs harder. I love my editor, I will always use paid services, and I will always recommend editors to other authors who come to me or that I talk to. Working with an editor has changed my entire outlook on writing and my enjoyment of the craft. If people can afford working with a nice editor, I really can't recommend it strongly enough. Many editors do fantastic work.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

swolf said:


> Which is my point. It's the final product that matters, not how you got there. Which definitely isn't the attitude around here.


That's always been my attitude. The problem is that, while it is the final result, the people who proclaim they did the best they could on their own, or had friends beta read, are more likely to have a profoundly flawed end product.

If a writer can get there on their own, if they can come up with tools and techniques to succeed, then what's to complain about?


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

modwitch said:


> I was paged ...
> 
> I haven't read all this thread, but to clarify my process... I have a content editor. I have an editor who focuses on story/developmental edit issues only, and then a copyeditor who also picks up minor content/continuity issues. I also have some trusted beta readers, but in my view, they're not a replacement for good content editing. I'm not saying you can't publish well without a content editor - but I sure appreciate mine .


Agreed about the content editor. One of the reasons I thought you used a critique group was because I was a part of the Pink Snowbunnies in Hell anthology you edited. We didn't use a content editor on that project and instead just had judges (a sort of critique group), and I think you used a new editor who was definitely not your content editor who thought she was only doing light proofreading. Thanks for clearing that up, and sorry to have misunderstood.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

modwitch said:


> Totally right - no content editor for the anthology . My regular editing team books far enough out that we'd still be waiting ;-P. I think critique circles can be very useful things - I just work differently, mostly because critique groups can't keep up with my output.


I had never really thought about that. I know that critique groups generally require that everyone get a chance to submit at least a chapter of their latest work before moving back to an author, and now that I think about it, that could certainly lead to problems if one or two authors are especially prolific!


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

MichelleR said:


> That's always been my attitude. The problem is that, while it is the final result, the people who proclaim they did the best they could on their own, or had friends beta read, are more likely to have a profoundly flawed end product.
> 
> If a writer can get there on their own, if they can come up with tools and techniques to succeed, then what's to complain about?


This reminds me of a post I did a long time ago on peer review in fiction. I really wish it was easier for each of us to discuss each other's fiction work without worrying about really severe author reactions. When I try to help someone nowadays, I try to give them a disclaimer, right up front in a private message. This disclaimer might be, "Hi. I was wondering if you would feel comfortable with discussing your blurb and cover (and maybe sample). I would just like to give you some feedback, if you are comfortable with it."

That kind of message has been met with mixed results but almost totally positive. New authors often appreciate this kind of thing. Authors with 2+ books may react in a way that shows they are obviously offended.

I think a type of peer review system, but not quite as intense as a critique circle, might be very beneficial to each of us as we develop into better authors. We could share advice and how working with editors shaped our books and why we think certain things work and why they don't. The problem, of course, is that all of this is very subjective and I've found that when it comes to fiction, we simply don't seem to be very good with peer review. What I mean by that is that we react very strongly to peer review which limits the impact and usefulness of the process.

I deal with peer review everyday. I submitted three conference papers in January, two in February, and another couple this month--one of which is due at the end of this week. Getting these constant critiques is absolutely fantastic for me in growing as a non-fiction, research-based author, but I've found that it's really hard to emulate that kind of environment here in fiction. And as other people have noted here, since how each reader absorbs a book is completely subjective, it's hard for anyone to clearly differentiate what really works and what doesn't.

I think the only thing most of us absolutely agree on is that poorly proofread books are inexcusable, regardless of genre. No reader enjoys accidental typos. Some of them might even hate intentional ones (e.g., accented dialogue) !


----------



## Jean E (Aug 29, 2011)

It's a funny old business, writing.  It's not like sculpture or painting,where you make your own object.  Of course sculptors and painters can go through long torturous processes to get to the end piece they were aiming for.  No doubt the process is a guide for some who stand back and ponder on the emergence of something worthwhile as they progress.  I have a few artist friends and one or two of them are not above asking for feedback and advice as they go.  Others prefer the company of their own interpretations and their own urges as they make art.

Books are different.  One person writes.  Others review.  Others correct.  Others edit.  It's a collaboration.  If a writer was left to produce a final manuscript on their own it would not be the same as the end result of the multiple input that usually goes on.  Personally, I understand the need for the collaborative nature of publishing.  But it makes me wonder all the same.  Why should readers know what to expect in particular genres?  If a painter stood in front of an empty canvass with a laden pallet and a plethora of brushes, no one, no one, would know what to expect.  I envy that freedom.

I confess to my newbieness.  I am one of those who sprung up because e publishing allowed me to.  Without the revolution my book would still be in the back of my wardrobe.  Unpublished.  Unsung.  And yes, I have an issue with traditional publishing.  Somewhere along the line it became all about the niche, the market, the target group. Here comes another one of my sins, I never set out to write for a particular group of readers.  I just wrote the book that was inside me.  That was the only way I could do it.  Actually that's not quite true.  I could have tried for the target group, but there would have been no joy in that for me.  No point.

As I read this thread I can see both sides. (It's a curse)  I cringe at the thought of badly written books with lots of spellling errors bypassing the process that would turn them into better books with no spelling mistakes.  But I also think about how odd it would be for someone to tell a painter that there were too many brush strokes in a painting.  I dare to wonder if something good will emerge in the wake of the independent writer.  If some shift in the corporate control of publishing wouldn't be a good thing.  If some readers might relish not knowing quite what to expect as they settle for the first time with a new book.

Now for my disclaimers:
I am not against editing.
I have no problem with people who use differing degrees of editorial input, or who don't use editors at all.  
Please know that as far as I am concerned you can do your thing your way.

Hang on, I'll just get my armour....  OK, go.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

Heh, you have a good point. Artists don't even have to use paint brushes. The link goes to an artist who lets couples have sex on a piece of canvas covered in paint and calls it art. That's the freedom of expression granted to artists, and the result can be a hundred thousand or million dollar painting !

Could we let a couple have sex on a keyboard and call it a book?

Hmmm... Maybe a picture book of couples having sex on a keyboard...


----------



## Phyllis Lily Jules (Dec 5, 2011)

Jean E said:


> It's a funny old business, writing. It's not like sculpture or painting,where you make your own object. Of course sculptors and painters can go through long torturous processes to get to the end piece they were aiming for. No doubt the process is a guide for some who stand back and ponder on the emergence of something worthwhile as they progress. I have a few artist friends and one or two of them are not above asking for feedback and advice as they go. Others prefer the company of their own interpretations and their own urges as they make art.
> 
> Books are different. One person writes. Others review. Others correct. Others edit. It's a collaboration. If a writer was left to produce a final manuscript on their own it would not be the same as the end result of the multiple input that usually goes on. Personally, I understand the need for the collaborative nature of publishing. But it makes me wonder all the same. Why should readers know what to expect in particular genres? If a painter stood in front of an empty canvass with a laden pallet and a plethora of brushes, no one, no one, would know what to expect. I envy that freedom.
> 
> ...


Wow. This is the first post, and a long one at that, where I have agreed with every single precise word. And, like Jean, if I said them all myself I'd be looking for armor, too. But since I don't have much armor to spare, I haven't said them.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Arkali said:


> Like some of the other editors on KB I really hate to even open my mouth in this thread, but I'm pretty sure Deb uses two editors and then has a final pass reading done. I'm not sure if she does paid proofreading after the second edit or not - further discussion of her production process will have to come from her


I noticed when I came that editors assiduously avoided talk of editing beyond the odd promotional word and little praise here and there-nothing dangerous, no need to rile the natives. The Code of Silence might preserve peace, but it does have a downside. I knew there was no chance of getting rid of it (for reasons that should be obvious by now), but newbies writers should at least know that it exists so they can judge the value of the advice they get. (Besides, I don't mind feigning social ineptitude for a good cause.)

Though I chided editors about it a time or two, I was in a far better position to speak frankly about the Code because, contrary to popular opinion, I don't depend on self-pubbers for a living. I work full time as a technical writer and science editor and I do freelance work for a few writers and a publishing house. My business wasn't going to be affected one way or the other. In fact, my interest in self-publishing has more to do with my interest in publishing my own stories (and avoiding taxes), not editing.

Anyway, I made my point about the Code and a few points about editing; now it's time to move on to a different subject. Good luck.


----------

