I'm back! I had my baby (although she insisted on arriving 2 weeks late), and she's fabulous. We've managed to keep her alive this long and are pretty proud of that fact. And we're even settling into the routine of being parents (would you believe we actually do pretty well on the sleep front?)
And so, having made it to almost 2 months old, I guess it's time I start returning to my regular duties. So, I'm back. Not just to blogging, although, yes, I am resuming my posts here. I'm back to writing. Or editing, rather.
It's odd to me to take a bunch of time off of a project and then go back to it. I can't just jump in where I left off and remember exactly what I was thinking/doing/etc. I have to re-read the whole project, usually, to remember what it was even about.
For me, that first re-read after some time off is weird. It's almost like reading something from another writer. I'll read a phrase or a paragraph and think, "Wow! That's great!" and then realize I wrote it. It feels so foreign, at first. I guess it's a good thing that I impress myself (sometimes) on re-reads, but it's strange - I would think that even after some time away, these words, these characters, this plot, should be familiar.
One hopes I don't forget all about my baby every time I hand her over to a babysitter :)
And there's more of this disconnect now that I have to work in smaller chunks of time, i.e. during naps. I don't need a refresher every time I come back to it, after that initial read through, but it takes me a while to orient myself again. I feel a bit like I'm taking two steps forward, one step back each time I sit down with these edits.
But, it'll get done. Editors wait for no man... or baby.
Skye
Showing posts with label editing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label editing. Show all posts
Friday, October 3, 2014
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
Letting it Stew
One of the the things I like to do when I'm not writing is to help other people who think they want to give this particular kind of crazy a try. Because of this, I run into a lot of preconceived ideas about authors, how they write, and what goes into making a book. Most of them are dead wrong but understandable too. Let's face it, until I jumped into this author thing with both feet I thought books sort of magically appeared on bookshelves everywhere.
It took a long time to sort me out. So I try to be pretty gentle sorting out expectations that fall a little short of the actual experience.
One of the things I tell new writers that seems to be particularly shocking to them is that after you write it, you need to put it away and forget about it for awhile. New authors are long on enthusiasm, but often short on patience. They want the book in bookstores, and they want it as soon as possible. I get that. I had the same problem.
But I stand by the rule. Put it away. Don't look at it, and if you can help it, don't think about it. Usually, I suggest/instruct/plead with them to write something else while they're waiting. For good reason. Newly finished manuscripts are a source of pride, obsession, and a lot of love. You worked hard on it. You finished it. You've earned the right to fawn a little. But before you move onto editing, you better fall the heck out of love...and fast.
The best way to do that is to fall in love with something else.
In the same way that smokers cannot smell the odor in their clothing. (I smoked, it's true) an author who is still living inside their story cannot see it. The blinders are on. To get a realistic view you have to move out, quit smoking that book, and completely reboot your senses again.
You have to clean your pallet.
In the same way that you can't see your ex clearly until you've fallen in love with someone new, well you get it. Let the first book stew. Let the story percolate and stale. But if possible, write something new, something more brilliant and just as engaging. Love it. Then put it away and go back to the first book ready to kick ass and take names.
Editing will hurt a lot less too, if you've got a new shiny in a drawer somewhere that you know is better anyway.
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Kill Your Darlings
As I write this, I'm in the midst of edits on a book that seems to be getting universal book love (from me, my betas, my editor…) It's kind of awesome that everyone lurves it so much, but edits must happen and so on and so forth.
Anyway, there's a bit of banter in the book that is, quite literally, my favorite piece. It cracks me up every time I read it. My editor told me to cut it. It's two lines. TWO! But this was the hardest change for me to make. It was my "darling" of this manuscript.
Here's the funny part. We are making a lot of changes to this book. They're going to take something that was already throwing everyone into book love and we're going to make it better. Like whoa better. But big work, lots of changes. And those two lines were the bit where I wanted to cry. That's what a "darling" is to me. The part that, if you have to change it, it breaks your heart a little. Anything less, and I'm all "kill it with fire!" But not that kind of darling.
The problem is, a good editor knows what the hell they're doing. They know the market. They know how the target audience will react to stuff. And, as much as it hurts, in this case, she's right. It's a pop culture reference that not everyone would immediately get, and that could possibly alienate readers since it happens so early in the book.
She was right, and it sucks.
So I took my two minutes of scowling at the email and sticking my tongue out at it and generally being a big old five-year-old.
And then I deleted it.
I killed it with fire.
As an author, it's fine to question your editor. Hell, I'd even argue that it's a good thing (so long as you aren't questioning every change). But once they explain, your job is to
If you have a good editor, this shouldn't be hard because step two is going to make you realize they're right. Your editor is not your adversary.
Just for the sake of getting it in your head, I'm going to repeat myself.
Your editor is not your adversary.
Your editor is your teammate. They are your right hand. They are the one that keeps you from charging into battle not only sans armor, but sans weapons. There has to be a level of trust there along with a level of professionalism.
Like it or lump it, you need to learn to kill your darlings--no matter how precious they are to you.
Anyway, there's a bit of banter in the book that is, quite literally, my favorite piece. It cracks me up every time I read it. My editor told me to cut it. It's two lines. TWO! But this was the hardest change for me to make. It was my "darling" of this manuscript.
Here's the funny part. We are making a lot of changes to this book. They're going to take something that was already throwing everyone into book love and we're going to make it better. Like whoa better. But big work, lots of changes. And those two lines were the bit where I wanted to cry. That's what a "darling" is to me. The part that, if you have to change it, it breaks your heart a little. Anything less, and I'm all "kill it with fire!" But not that kind of darling.
The problem is, a good editor knows what the hell they're doing. They know the market. They know how the target audience will react to stuff. And, as much as it hurts, in this case, she's right. It's a pop culture reference that not everyone would immediately get, and that could possibly alienate readers since it happens so early in the book.
She was right, and it sucks.
So I took my two minutes of scowling at the email and sticking my tongue out at it and generally being a big old five-year-old.
And then I deleted it.
I killed it with fire.
As an author, it's fine to question your editor. Hell, I'd even argue that it's a good thing (so long as you aren't questioning every change). But once they explain, your job is to
- throw whatever kind of in-the-privacy-of-your-own-home (and-dear-gods-not-on-the-internet) fit you need to
- thoroughly examine their reasoning
- repeat steps 1 & 2 as needed
- and (barring a damn good reason not to) make the fucking changes.
If you have a good editor, this shouldn't be hard because step two is going to make you realize they're right. Your editor is not your adversary.
Just for the sake of getting it in your head, I'm going to repeat myself.
Your editor is not your adversary.
Your editor is your teammate. They are your right hand. They are the one that keeps you from charging into battle not only sans armor, but sans weapons. There has to be a level of trust there along with a level of professionalism.
Like it or lump it, you need to learn to kill your darlings--no matter how precious they are to you.
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
You Are Going to Miss Something
I was talking with a friend yesterday about an opportunity she had to do some content editing. She's new (but will be excellent, I have no doubt), and was struggling with what to charge. Of the many considerations and issues she weighed, one concern that came up was charging money for a service like this and then missing something during the work.
A typo. A plot hole. An improper word usage. A pacing issue. There are all things that can be missed.
And here's what I told her, which I wish someone had told me way back when but I had to figure out with a lot of trial and error: you are going to miss something.
Just get that out of the way immediately.
Whether you're writing, or you're beta reading, or you're editing. Whether it's paid work or a favor. Whether you're the first set of eyes to go over something or the fifteenth.
You are going to miss something. You are going to make a mistake.
I know this because I read. I've been a reader since I was a toddler and able to hold a book.
And I have never, in my life (or at least recollection), read a single book without some kind of error in it. Whether it's something small that changes the sentence (recently I saw "didn't" when it should've just been "did"), or a grammar thing ("lay" when it should be "lie"), or a style thing ("my Mom" when it should've been "my mom"), or a chunk of text that was accidentally copied and pasted twice, or factual error, or something that contradicted something else (like a character wearing one shirt removing it twice in one scene).
No, not self-published books, either (let's not even touch those ones for the moment). Books with large publishers--in some cases, by NYT bestselling authors. And no, I'm not bringing this up to support the utter bullshit "editors don't edit anymore" cry that idiots spout.
I have a crystal-clear memory of when I was eight years old, on a trip to Santo Domingo, sitting at the resort poolside with a book in hand. It was one of the Nancy Drew Files. And suddenly there was a girl named Beth in the scene.
Beth.
I went back a few pages, scanned. No Beth. Who the hell was Beth? And then I realized it was meant to be Bess. Nancy's friend. Two letters off.
This happened well over twenty years ago. So my point is that this is not a new occurrence.
I know a lot of writers and editors. I know how hard people work. All of the examples above? The Nancy Drew book from the 80s? People worked their asses off on those books. Multiple pairs of eyes went over them. Extremely skilled people, who are damn good at their jobs, combed those books thoroughly. I have no doubt many, many errors were caught.
Something always gets missed.
As an editor, I've been handed books that went through three to four beta readers, multiple rewrites, and I still found timeline confusion and logic holes. And even then, after publication, I've been notified of yet another error I missed, and felt like a complete idiot over it.
As a writer, I spend hundreds and hundreds of hours on my books. I reread them dozens of times, poring over all 100K-odd words of them. Other people go over comb them for errors. And yet someone, even years later, inevitably finds a typo (and deigns to notify me of this fact with implications I'm a moron for not seeing it).
None of this is meant to excuse deliberately sloppy work. In fact, this post isn't even directed at those sorts of people--as far as I'm concerned, they are still sitting in the corner without dinner and I will speak to them later when I think they've learned their lesson. No, I'm talking to those of you who try so goddamn hard to be perfect and beat yourself up later when you realized something slipped through. Or those of you who get so paralyzed by the fear of missing something that you don't get started.
You are going to miss something.
This doesn't mean you don't try to be perfect. It's not an excuse to get lazy. It's not a reason to stop striving for improvement.
But it means accept that even busting your ass, you're going to fuck something up somewhere along the line. It's just going to happen. It is like death and taxes that way. The most skilled people with extreme attention to detail and years of training and experience will still do it. We call it "human error" because we're humans: people with eyes that get blind to text and brains that get tired and workdays that get interrupted and memories that forget.
You are going to miss something.
You accept this, strive to do your best, and if you find out you made a mistake, take note of it and try better next time. Beating yourself up after the fact or being too paralyzed to start in the first place (both of which have happened to me) isn't going to Fix All the Errors, and even if it did...
One day in the future, you will still miss something else. Accept that now and save yourself the stress, because your energy is better spent on doing the work rather than worrying about the work.
A typo. A plot hole. An improper word usage. A pacing issue. There are all things that can be missed.
And here's what I told her, which I wish someone had told me way back when but I had to figure out with a lot of trial and error: you are going to miss something.
Just get that out of the way immediately.
Whether you're writing, or you're beta reading, or you're editing. Whether it's paid work or a favor. Whether you're the first set of eyes to go over something or the fifteenth.
You are going to miss something. You are going to make a mistake.
I know this because I read. I've been a reader since I was a toddler and able to hold a book.
And I have never, in my life (or at least recollection), read a single book without some kind of error in it. Whether it's something small that changes the sentence (recently I saw "didn't" when it should've just been "did"), or a grammar thing ("lay" when it should be "lie"), or a style thing ("my Mom" when it should've been "my mom"), or a chunk of text that was accidentally copied and pasted twice, or factual error, or something that contradicted something else (like a character wearing one shirt removing it twice in one scene).
No, not self-published books, either (let's not even touch those ones for the moment). Books with large publishers--in some cases, by NYT bestselling authors. And no, I'm not bringing this up to support the utter bullshit "editors don't edit anymore" cry that idiots spout.
I have a crystal-clear memory of when I was eight years old, on a trip to Santo Domingo, sitting at the resort poolside with a book in hand. It was one of the Nancy Drew Files. And suddenly there was a girl named Beth in the scene.
Beth.
I went back a few pages, scanned. No Beth. Who the hell was Beth? And then I realized it was meant to be Bess. Nancy's friend. Two letters off.
This happened well over twenty years ago. So my point is that this is not a new occurrence.
I know a lot of writers and editors. I know how hard people work. All of the examples above? The Nancy Drew book from the 80s? People worked their asses off on those books. Multiple pairs of eyes went over them. Extremely skilled people, who are damn good at their jobs, combed those books thoroughly. I have no doubt many, many errors were caught.
Something always gets missed.
As an editor, I've been handed books that went through three to four beta readers, multiple rewrites, and I still found timeline confusion and logic holes. And even then, after publication, I've been notified of yet another error I missed, and felt like a complete idiot over it.
As a writer, I spend hundreds and hundreds of hours on my books. I reread them dozens of times, poring over all 100K-odd words of them. Other people go over comb them for errors. And yet someone, even years later, inevitably finds a typo (and deigns to notify me of this fact with implications I'm a moron for not seeing it).
None of this is meant to excuse deliberately sloppy work. In fact, this post isn't even directed at those sorts of people--as far as I'm concerned, they are still sitting in the corner without dinner and I will speak to them later when I think they've learned their lesson. No, I'm talking to those of you who try so goddamn hard to be perfect and beat yourself up later when you realized something slipped through. Or those of you who get so paralyzed by the fear of missing something that you don't get started.
You are going to miss something.
This doesn't mean you don't try to be perfect. It's not an excuse to get lazy. It's not a reason to stop striving for improvement.
But it means accept that even busting your ass, you're going to fuck something up somewhere along the line. It's just going to happen. It is like death and taxes that way. The most skilled people with extreme attention to detail and years of training and experience will still do it. We call it "human error" because we're humans: people with eyes that get blind to text and brains that get tired and workdays that get interrupted and memories that forget.
You are going to miss something.
You accept this, strive to do your best, and if you find out you made a mistake, take note of it and try better next time. Beating yourself up after the fact or being too paralyzed to start in the first place (both of which have happened to me) isn't going to Fix All the Errors, and even if it did...
One day in the future, you will still miss something else. Accept that now and save yourself the stress, because your energy is better spent on doing the work rather than worrying about the work.
Monday, November 11, 2013
Wherein Mama Bitchstress Puts You in the Corner and Makes You Think About What You've Done
I traumatized a few people on Twitter last night because I ran into something horrific and had to share the pain.
It was a book on Kindle (of course), self-published (of course), in which the author was arguing with negative reviews. The book in question--fiction, and romance (or possibly erotic romance at that)--was written in all caps.
All caps.
Yes, THOSE ALL CAPS.
Also, it was riddled with spelling errors (like "eys" for "eyes"), wrong word usage ("bare" for "bear"), had almost no paragraph breaks, and...did I mention it was IN ALL CAPS?
The author's defense of this is that a) she is a new author, b) these books are "in progress", c) they're written purely for enjoyment (although she is charging $2.99 a pop for them), d) she works at a pantry kitchen and some of the money made will be going to feed the homeless.
No. No. No. Annndddd...no.
I bring this up because this is not an isolated incident. Talk to anyone and you'll hear stories of books being sold on Kindle that flat out say "this book is a draft/work in progress" and "I can't afford an editor" in the description.
Come. Come sit at my feet as I have something very important to tell you. Lean in close. I want you to remember this.
YOU DO NOT PUBLISH BOOKS THAT ARE NOT READY TO BE SOLD.
Readers should not be paying for the "privilege" to be your betas or your editors. "Writers" who do this are the reason we can't have nice things.
If I go to a restaurant and pay money for food, I don't expect to be given a plate of lumpy mashed potatoes and still-frozen vegetables with someone's spit in a glass in place of water because the chef is "still learning." If I pay money for a meal, I expect it to be, you know, COOKED and well-prepared.
If I pick up a movie I've paid money for, I don't expect to see the actors fubbing their lines, mics in the scene, and the director walking in the background, with everything over a blue screen and no special effects added. If I see a movie, I expect it to be, you know, FINISHED.
When you ask someone to shell out money for your product, you damn well need to be sure it's the best fucking product and worthy of that money. There are hundreds of thousands of books out there--readers have a lot of options. They pay our bills, they support this industry, and they deserve the very best.
KDP is not where you put something "purely for enjoyment". You put shit up on your website or blog if that's what it's for and don't charge money for it. KDP is not where you go to find beta readers. You go to online writer groups and try to find crit partners. KDP is not where you go to find an editor. You find online resources for self-publishers and hire someone.
"But Mama Bitchstress, I can't afford--"
Stop it.
If you CHOOSE to self-publish--and it is a choice, no one is holding a fucking gun to your head--then you spend the money to have someone edit the work and put out a decent cover (not slap some Papyrus text on a poorly sized stock photo you threw into MS Paint). If you're charging readers money for something, you damn well better give them something WORTHY of that money. If you cannot afford an editor, then don't self-publish. Period. Full stop. The end. We all know normal typos happen, especially in longer works, but three or four of those is a far cry from BOOKS WRITTEN IN ALL CAPS WITH NO PARAGRAPH BREAKS OMG SOMEONE SHOOT ME.
If Mama Bitchstress catches you pulling this kind of shit, I am going to come in to your house and take your keyboard away and I won't give it back until you've had time to think about what you've done. If you argue, I am going to beat you to death with that keyboard, pull out a Ouija board, call your spirit up from hell--where people who self-publish without an editor go, and they have to read SLUSH, 24/7--to yell at you some more.
This isn't just about readers, though.
This is about you.
Presumably you want a career, yes? You want to be around ten years from now? Do you really want people to associate you with a book written in all caps?
Let me tell you, you will be judged on what you've written regardless of what stage you were at when you wrote it. I am. All the time. And I'm not even talking about something as absurd as I've mentioned above--I'm talking about books that aren't terribly written, and have been edited, and are still young. They're not as I'd write them now but I don't get to go back in time and alter scenes I wrote when I was a twenty-one-year-old kid. And neither will you.
Respect yourself. Respect readers. Don't be in such a fucking rush.
Also, readers, please stop buying books that admit to only being drafts or works in progress. Because even if you one-star and return it later, you're only encouraging these people.
It was a book on Kindle (of course), self-published (of course), in which the author was arguing with negative reviews. The book in question--fiction, and romance (or possibly erotic romance at that)--was written in all caps.
All caps.
Yes, THOSE ALL CAPS.
Also, it was riddled with spelling errors (like "eys" for "eyes"), wrong word usage ("bare" for "bear"), had almost no paragraph breaks, and...did I mention it was IN ALL CAPS?
The author's defense of this is that a) she is a new author, b) these books are "in progress", c) they're written purely for enjoyment (although she is charging $2.99 a pop for them), d) she works at a pantry kitchen and some of the money made will be going to feed the homeless.
No. No. No. Annndddd...no.
 |
| Listen to Loki. He only wants what's best for you. |
I bring this up because this is not an isolated incident. Talk to anyone and you'll hear stories of books being sold on Kindle that flat out say "this book is a draft/work in progress" and "I can't afford an editor" in the description.
Come. Come sit at my feet as I have something very important to tell you. Lean in close. I want you to remember this.
YOU DO NOT PUBLISH BOOKS THAT ARE NOT READY TO BE SOLD.
Readers should not be paying for the "privilege" to be your betas or your editors. "Writers" who do this are the reason we can't have nice things.
If I go to a restaurant and pay money for food, I don't expect to be given a plate of lumpy mashed potatoes and still-frozen vegetables with someone's spit in a glass in place of water because the chef is "still learning." If I pay money for a meal, I expect it to be, you know, COOKED and well-prepared.
If I pick up a movie I've paid money for, I don't expect to see the actors fubbing their lines, mics in the scene, and the director walking in the background, with everything over a blue screen and no special effects added. If I see a movie, I expect it to be, you know, FINISHED.
When you ask someone to shell out money for your product, you damn well need to be sure it's the best fucking product and worthy of that money. There are hundreds of thousands of books out there--readers have a lot of options. They pay our bills, they support this industry, and they deserve the very best.
KDP is not where you put something "purely for enjoyment". You put shit up on your website or blog if that's what it's for and don't charge money for it. KDP is not where you go to find beta readers. You go to online writer groups and try to find crit partners. KDP is not where you go to find an editor. You find online resources for self-publishers and hire someone.
"But Mama Bitchstress, I can't afford--"
Stop it.
If you CHOOSE to self-publish--and it is a choice, no one is holding a fucking gun to your head--then you spend the money to have someone edit the work and put out a decent cover (not slap some Papyrus text on a poorly sized stock photo you threw into MS Paint). If you're charging readers money for something, you damn well better give them something WORTHY of that money. If you cannot afford an editor, then don't self-publish. Period. Full stop. The end. We all know normal typos happen, especially in longer works, but three or four of those is a far cry from BOOKS WRITTEN IN ALL CAPS WITH NO PARAGRAPH BREAKS OMG SOMEONE SHOOT ME.
If Mama Bitchstress catches you pulling this kind of shit, I am going to come in to your house and take your keyboard away and I won't give it back until you've had time to think about what you've done. If you argue, I am going to beat you to death with that keyboard, pull out a Ouija board, call your spirit up from hell--where people who self-publish without an editor go, and they have to read SLUSH, 24/7--to yell at you some more.
This isn't just about readers, though.
This is about you.
Presumably you want a career, yes? You want to be around ten years from now? Do you really want people to associate you with a book written in all caps?
Let me tell you, you will be judged on what you've written regardless of what stage you were at when you wrote it. I am. All the time. And I'm not even talking about something as absurd as I've mentioned above--I'm talking about books that aren't terribly written, and have been edited, and are still young. They're not as I'd write them now but I don't get to go back in time and alter scenes I wrote when I was a twenty-one-year-old kid. And neither will you.
Respect yourself. Respect readers. Don't be in such a fucking rush.
Also, readers, please stop buying books that admit to only being drafts or works in progress. Because even if you one-star and return it later, you're only encouraging these people.
@skyladawn Any book description that admits to being a draft.... should be like a trap. Anyone who buys it gets their Kindle taken away.
— Wendy Sparrow (@WendySparrow) November 11, 2013
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Biting the Hand...
A while back, I was doing my normal thing and poking around Twitter while I made breakfast when this popped up in my feed:
I mean, all published authors have had some edits that make them want to scream but, dude... You're a goddamn professional. Grab a pillow, scream, then pull up your panties and get to work.
Here's a little mantra that might help you:
Editing isn't like a break up, it's really not. Your editor is not taking your book (heart) and ripping it to shreds in order to leave it (you) destroyed. It might momentarily feel that way, but it's not reality. Your editor's job is to make your book better.
Look at it like Frankenstein's monster.
Dude is basically building a person. He's got a pretty good handle on anatomy and has all the requisite equipment. When he flips the switch, the creature animates but...chaos results.
In the book world, that kind of chaos is bad.
Imagine if Frankenstein had an editor. Said editor would point out things like how stupid it would be to use a criminal's brain or heart. Bad juju. They'd notice that gaping hole where some organ or other should be. They might even be able to point out how to revive the creature without it turning monstrous.
Granted, that creature wouldn't have been as interesting to read about, but it would have LIVED. It would have been a miracle rather than a monster.
Writers, without a good editor, are creating monsters.
Now, you and your particular editor might not be a good fit. The editor might not "get" you. This happens, but it's no excuse for sending hate mail. It's no excuse for acting like a diva. Your art isn't art yet. It's palatable crap. You want--no, you deserve for it to be better than that, so why would you not take everything your editor says to heart?
Of course, there will be bits and pieces that require discussion and a few things that maybe you should fight for, but the author-editor relationship should be one of partners. Ask questions, get clarification, fight for that one scene that you know readers will love. But don't be an ass about it.
In fact--unless you are under mad deadlines which are rare with first round edits--don't do anything with your edits for at least 24 hours after you read them. Let them gel in your mind. Then read them again. Stuff that pissed you off at first glance might make more sense. And if they don't, give yourself another 24. Read the manuscript again with the editor comments in your mind and see if you can understand where the editor was coming from.
Then, take your questions, concerns, etc. and talk to the editor politely. They just spent a lot of time pouring over your work to help you make it better. Respect that. And choose your battles. There are darlings that will need to be killed in the editing process. Sometimes a lot of them. Be a professional and accept that fact.
24-48 hours. That's all. And it could be enough to keep you from turning a partnership into an adversarial mess. It could be enough to keep you from garnering a reputation as an author who is a bear to work with. Publishing isn't as big a world as people like to think--don't ruin your place in it with your ego.
Sending hate mail to your editor after they worked hard to give you honest, thorough, critical edits/critiques is not the way to go.I threw up a little in my mouth when I read it.
— Rachel Russell (@RachelxRussell) October 3, 2013
I mean, all published authors have had some edits that make them want to scream but, dude... You're a goddamn professional. Grab a pillow, scream, then pull up your panties and get to work.
Here's a little mantra that might help you:
My editor is not my enemy. My editor is my book's very best friend.Post it all over your office, house, car... tattoo it backwards on your forehead (so you can read it in the mirror) or forward on your arm (so it's visible every time you sit down at your computer). Learn it. Live it. Love it.
Editing isn't like a break up, it's really not. Your editor is not taking your book (heart) and ripping it to shreds in order to leave it (you) destroyed. It might momentarily feel that way, but it's not reality. Your editor's job is to make your book better.
Look at it like Frankenstein's monster.
Dude is basically building a person. He's got a pretty good handle on anatomy and has all the requisite equipment. When he flips the switch, the creature animates but...chaos results.
In the book world, that kind of chaos is bad.
Imagine if Frankenstein had an editor. Said editor would point out things like how stupid it would be to use a criminal's brain or heart. Bad juju. They'd notice that gaping hole where some organ or other should be. They might even be able to point out how to revive the creature without it turning monstrous.
Granted, that creature wouldn't have been as interesting to read about, but it would have LIVED. It would have been a miracle rather than a monster.
Writers, without a good editor, are creating monsters.
Now, you and your particular editor might not be a good fit. The editor might not "get" you. This happens, but it's no excuse for sending hate mail. It's no excuse for acting like a diva. Your art isn't art yet. It's palatable crap. You want--no, you deserve for it to be better than that, so why would you not take everything your editor says to heart?
Of course, there will be bits and pieces that require discussion and a few things that maybe you should fight for, but the author-editor relationship should be one of partners. Ask questions, get clarification, fight for that one scene that you know readers will love. But don't be an ass about it.
In fact--unless you are under mad deadlines which are rare with first round edits--don't do anything with your edits for at least 24 hours after you read them. Let them gel in your mind. Then read them again. Stuff that pissed you off at first glance might make more sense. And if they don't, give yourself another 24. Read the manuscript again with the editor comments in your mind and see if you can understand where the editor was coming from.
Then, take your questions, concerns, etc. and talk to the editor politely. They just spent a lot of time pouring over your work to help you make it better. Respect that. And choose your battles. There are darlings that will need to be killed in the editing process. Sometimes a lot of them. Be a professional and accept that fact.
24-48 hours. That's all. And it could be enough to keep you from turning a partnership into an adversarial mess. It could be enough to keep you from garnering a reputation as an author who is a bear to work with. Publishing isn't as big a world as people like to think--don't ruin your place in it with your ego.
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
The Write Attitude
Well, I'm done whining and back to talking about something useful. Phew. This is the second segment in my "Dishing as Well as You Take" critique class. The first bit was here and talks about finding the right critique group/situation for your needs. Once you've signed up...
***Adding in here. The Hear and Consider part sounds pretty simplistic, but when your baby is under the microscope, it can be a lot harder than it sounds. Even for a veteran. There will always be one work, or one character or one writing flaw that you are resistant to seeing objectively. Learning to control that resistance, at least long enough to entertain the possibility the critique is correct, is hard to do, but so worth it.
Listening can save you from embarrassment later. It can help you find your blind spots and it WILL help your writing go to print in a stronger form.
Next up: Diplomacy. How to give bad news with a smile and not come off as an ass.
In the event that you do find the right mesh of form,
function and individual factors, a feedback situation will not work if you
enter it with the wrong expectations and attitude. Too often, critique or any
sort of feedback is viewed as a necessary evil, and that kind of perspective can
set the writer off on exactly the wrong foot when it comes to surviving and
thriving in a world that is all about criticism and feedback.
Any author preparing to enter into a critique situation
should do some deep soul searching and examine their honest feelings about
feedback. Will you be able to distance criticism of your work from criticism of
yourself? Do you feel defensive just at the thought of someone suggesting you make
changes to your manuscript? If someone simply disliked your work, would you be
able to allow them that opinion without taking that judgment to heart?
In all honestly, the answer to at least one of these
questions will probably be nope…not ready for that. Most authors feel the
initial sting of feedback, the cringe and knee-jerk urge to defend; however,
the important thing is to figure out if you can learn to accept and work in
that situation without allowing that instinct to win over.
Whatever your initial reaction to a comment on your work,
to succeed in a feedback situation the author must be able to detach, to put
aside defensiveness, argument, and hostility and absolutely consider that the
feedback might be completely accurate.
That’s not to say you’ll have to agree with it in the end,
but, for at least a moment, you must be able to allow that IT MIGHT be true.
Otherwise the critique process will be completely useless to you. If you answer
every change with argument, every comment with defense and interpret every
suggestion as attack, then you will not function well, if at all, in a feedback
environment.
Opinions and suggestions that an author is unable to
honestly HEAR and CONSIDER will do nothing for them or their work. Not that
there is anything wrong with feeling this way about your writing, in particular
at the beginning. But, if this is the case, then a critique circle will only
waste your time and your partners’.
***Adding in here. The Hear and Consider part sounds pretty simplistic, but when your baby is under the microscope, it can be a lot harder than it sounds. Even for a veteran. There will always be one work, or one character or one writing flaw that you are resistant to seeing objectively. Learning to control that resistance, at least long enough to entertain the possibility the critique is correct, is hard to do, but so worth it.
Listening can save you from embarrassment later. It can help you find your blind spots and it WILL help your writing go to print in a stronger form.
Next up: Diplomacy. How to give bad news with a smile and not come off as an ass.
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Writing Out Loud
Objectivity isn't easy when you're dealing with your own creation. We try, of course. We know it's necessary for the truly effective editing, revising, rewriting phase. We put the freshly shiny manuscript aside and let it perk, we ignore it, we try to fall in love with a new story before approaching it again. But the words on the paper are still ours. Even though the "set it aside for some distance" strategy works (and I highly recommend it) we're still so close to our words. Deep down, we still gloss over them.
They are very hard to see clearly.
It turns out what really helps bring them into focus is to HEAR them. A lot of people suggest reading your work out loud, I know. But for years I took this advice in, processed it, considered it, acknowledged its validity and then consistently ignored it. I mean, it's embarrassing, talking to yourself. Even completely alone, I found it uncomfortable to read out loud. I got the theory, but to actually do it seemed silly, goofy, possibly slightly insane.
Then I signed up to do a public reading. (eep) After my initial panic attack subsided, I started to practice. I read and re-read. I recorded. I read to the mirror, to my family, to anyone I could get to sit still for me. Nothing like the fear of looking stupid in public to motivate me, let me tell you.
And despite the fact that I survived this public reading thing, (and even actually enjoyed it) the big revelation in the process was how much crud I discovered hiding in my manuscript. I found goofs I'd never seen. I found typos. I could hear the rhythm of the story and even when I didn't find an error, I found a thing or two I'd have liked to word differently.
I'll be damned.
I hate it when that happens. I mean, if I'd taken the stupid advice years ago....well, you get it. Reading out loud works. It works really well. I highly recommend it, but then, so did everyone else long before I came around. Will I read everything I write aloud from now on? I doubt I'm that devoted, but I might give it a try.
I'll definitely be talking to myself more than usual. Edit, edit, edit, read!
They are very hard to see clearly.
It turns out what really helps bring them into focus is to HEAR them. A lot of people suggest reading your work out loud, I know. But for years I took this advice in, processed it, considered it, acknowledged its validity and then consistently ignored it. I mean, it's embarrassing, talking to yourself. Even completely alone, I found it uncomfortable to read out loud. I got the theory, but to actually do it seemed silly, goofy, possibly slightly insane.
Then I signed up to do a public reading. (eep) After my initial panic attack subsided, I started to practice. I read and re-read. I recorded. I read to the mirror, to my family, to anyone I could get to sit still for me. Nothing like the fear of looking stupid in public to motivate me, let me tell you.
And despite the fact that I survived this public reading thing, (and even actually enjoyed it) the big revelation in the process was how much crud I discovered hiding in my manuscript. I found goofs I'd never seen. I found typos. I could hear the rhythm of the story and even when I didn't find an error, I found a thing or two I'd have liked to word differently.
I'll be damned.
I hate it when that happens. I mean, if I'd taken the stupid advice years ago....well, you get it. Reading out loud works. It works really well. I highly recommend it, but then, so did everyone else long before I came around. Will I read everything I write aloud from now on? I doubt I'm that devoted, but I might give it a try.
I'll definitely be talking to myself more than usual. Edit, edit, edit, read!
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Editing Is Like...Selling Your House
For those who don't know, we're getting ready to move across the state. That means putting our house up for sale, which means making it look all nice and shiny. Our realtor actually paid for a walk-through with a staging expert...you know, a house-editor.
She came through and pointed out...everything. A lot of it is simple stuff: rearranging the furniture, putting a bunch of stuff from the closets in storage, blah blah blah. This is the line edit stage. Now, I don't know about you, but I like line edits. They're pretty straight-forward even if they take a decent amount of work, and it's rare that cuts/tweaks here are of the painful variety. Same with the house. There's a lot of this level stuff and it all takes time, but it's easy enough.
Then there's the prettifying stuff that we're hiring the stager to actually take care of: putting the right kind of art on the walls, the little jars and candles and stuff that make the house look like a model home rather than like people actually...live here. This is the copyedit stage. Even less painful than line edits. Basically this is the smile and nod part of the job. You trust the person in charge for the most part to make things as pretty as possible.
So...the hard part? Content edits--this is pretty literal with regard to home staging too. Four rooms had to be repainted because of decorating choices. Countertops have to be replaced with granite. Carpets all have to be cleaned (and some stretched). Powerwashing the outside. Painting the door and trim. Now some of this stuff is fine. It's work, but that's it. Other parts...it's like killing your darlings. For example, today I spent the entire day tearing wallpaper off a single room...so I can repaint it tomorrow. A lot of work for one room that may or may not make a difference in the reality of selling. The granite? It's going to cost quite a bit more than we estimated. Will it really matter? And do we have to go with the boring beige?
Those changes are harder to make. They hurt more. But...
At the end of the day, we have an expert telling us what to do to make our house the best it can be. It's just like trusting an editor with your book. Their job is to make it shine. There are battles worth fighting (both in staging and editing) but it's important to remember to pick and choose them carefully.
She came through and pointed out...everything. A lot of it is simple stuff: rearranging the furniture, putting a bunch of stuff from the closets in storage, blah blah blah. This is the line edit stage. Now, I don't know about you, but I like line edits. They're pretty straight-forward even if they take a decent amount of work, and it's rare that cuts/tweaks here are of the painful variety. Same with the house. There's a lot of this level stuff and it all takes time, but it's easy enough.
Then there's the prettifying stuff that we're hiring the stager to actually take care of: putting the right kind of art on the walls, the little jars and candles and stuff that make the house look like a model home rather than like people actually...live here. This is the copyedit stage. Even less painful than line edits. Basically this is the smile and nod part of the job. You trust the person in charge for the most part to make things as pretty as possible.
So...the hard part? Content edits--this is pretty literal with regard to home staging too. Four rooms had to be repainted because of decorating choices. Countertops have to be replaced with granite. Carpets all have to be cleaned (and some stretched). Powerwashing the outside. Painting the door and trim. Now some of this stuff is fine. It's work, but that's it. Other parts...it's like killing your darlings. For example, today I spent the entire day tearing wallpaper off a single room...so I can repaint it tomorrow. A lot of work for one room that may or may not make a difference in the reality of selling. The granite? It's going to cost quite a bit more than we estimated. Will it really matter? And do we have to go with the boring beige?
Those changes are harder to make. They hurt more. But...
At the end of the day, we have an expert telling us what to do to make our house the best it can be. It's just like trusting an editor with your book. Their job is to make it shine. There are battles worth fighting (both in staging and editing) but it's important to remember to pick and choose them carefully.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)