I’m often asked what’s the best part of being a published author, as opposed to an unpublished author.
Well, there are the obvious things: I get to see my book in print; I actually get to make money doing something I love; I get to do school visits and talk about my work, etc etc. But there are other things too, that aren’t as obvious. One is that I get to work intensively with a very gifted editor, Liz Waniewski, who knows how to tease out the real story behind my story – sounds simple, but believe me, it isn’t.
Another thing I adore is having a professional copyeditor. As a graduate student I did a fair amount of copyediting for my professors, although mine was definitely of the “this word is spelled wrong” and “this sentence is missing a verb” variety. To be honest, my copyeditor at Penguin, Regina Castillo, is in an entirely different class.
For instance, my next book (now entitled THOU SHALT NOT ROAD TRIP) has just received the Regina treatment, and . . . whoa! She doesn’t just highlight typos (although she found plenty of those) or sentences that aren’t quite right (although she found plenty of those, too), but she’s like a continuity editor on a movie–making sure that actions aren’t duplicated or missing altogether, keeping people’s behavior consistent, and pointing out other inaccuracies. Here are a few examples of my sentences from the book with her comments in brackets:
All eyes are on me, and it’s clear that even drenched in sweat, everyone knows who I am. [Recast? Everyone is not drenched in sweat.]
I shake her hand again, and it’s not until she’s gone that I realize what she just said. [When did he shake her hand the first time?]
Still, I don’t think Matt wants to hear it, so I pretend it was a rhetorical question and nod sympathetically. [If it's rhetorical, Matt doesn't expect any response.]
Teresa pouts her lips. [Is lips redundant here? I'm not sure it's possible to pout anything else.]
See what I mean? Bear in mind that these are taken at random from the first few chapters. There are about 500 more comments where those came from! It’s such a luxury for me to have my novel go through this process – it makes me look much smarter when the finished version comes out.
Anyway, thanks to Regina, and to copyeditors everywhere for making us authors look good.
Finally, a quick shout to my wonderful hosts this morning: the students at Lindbergh High School in St. Louis and their librarian Mrs. Siefert. You’re all awesome.
We love shout outs, thanks! The kids are talking about your cool accent. Yes, that is all it took to win them over
Mindy – It’s my strongest asset, I know. My wife has said she’ll ditch me if I ever lose the accent. Thanks again to everyone at Lindbergh HS!
Loved reading about your editor and copyeditor. I sometimes do a little bit of (VERY LIGHT AND EASY) copyediting at work, but the continuity-eyeballing sounds like some awesome attention to detail.
Also loved the peek into the next novel. So far I know there’s sweating, pouting, and handshaking going on! =)
You’re spot on, Capillya. And let’s be honest, once you have sweating, pouting, and handshaking, what else do you need?
These are great examples, and they really help shed some light on the differences between editing and copyediting. People are sometimes surprised to hear there’s more to it than just checking for typos, especially when it comes to novels. Best of luck with your next book!
Got this from a FB friend and it’s especially interesting to read today, since on another blog (SmartBitchesTrashyBooks.com) there’s an extensive discussion on the lack of editing in some published books and the fact that many of us are now seeing numerous flagrant mistakes in published books. Not just typos, but major contentinuity errors (eyes changing color and even characters changing names). Even entire scenes and paragraphs missing. It’s a trend I have especially noticed over the past two to three years. It seems that some publishers are cutting back on or even eliminating the professional copyediting step.
I’m not an author nor do I play one on TV, but as an avid reader it is very annoying to pay a high price for a book only to find it riddled with errors. It’s lovely to know that some publishing houses are still doing it right!
Those are great examples. It’s wise to get an editor, I did for my little booklet and I’m so glad I did! She cleaned it up and had me expand in some areas and the final product is something I can be very proud of! Your new book sounds intriguing! Can’t wait to read it!
Blessings,
Mel
Please feel free to stop by: Trailing After God
And apparently I cannot spell continuity. Sorry!
Thanks for giving copyeditors their due. We are actually an author’s invisible help that goes unrecognized all over. Thanks for bringing us out!!
Natalia and Robinjn – You’ve both hit the nail on the head. Checking for typos requires a keen eye and great concentration, but first-rate copyeditors manage to do that AND look for continuity errors. Last night I was correcting a section in my book in which I describe the effect of sunset on bluffs rising from a river. The copyeditor noted that given my (assumed) timeline, it should be around 10PM, and the sun sets at 8:35PM on that day of the year. This kind of attention to detail is simply jaw-dropping. I wish all authors were so fortunate as to have this kind of editorial backup!
Mel – Well done for enlisting the help of an editor. When I do school visits, one of the things I try to explain to students is just how collaborative the book-writing process is. Students assume that since my name is on the cover, I’m sorely responsible for the contents, but nothing could be farther from the truth. Good luck with your booklet!
Indira – It’s my pleasure to give copyeditors their due. Believe me, I know how indebted I am to mine. All she’ll get for her hard work is half a line in the acknowledgments, which equates to one word for every 100 mistakes she picked up on. It’s not a fair exchange rate, and shows once more the extent to which copyeditors toil in relative obscurity, and rarely get their due.
Great read Anthony. I found your blog through a friend’s post on Facebook. I believe that working with a great copywriter could be a real joy and frustration based on your notes above.
Thanks for sharing.
Thank you, Anthony John, for explaining, from an author’s point of view, why writers need editors.
By the way, David Groff, who used to be an editor at Crown, would probably say that you have some redundancy in the first sentence of your post by writing, “…published author.” In his opinion, an author is a writer whose work has been published. Thus, you couldn’t call yourself an author unless your work had been published. Sorry, the editor in me just couldn’t resist pointing that out.
As an editor at a publishing company, I’d like to thank you for this post. We often are seen as the enemy of the writer, when we really just want them to look good. Now I can’t wait to read some of your books!
Shane – Joy, yes. Frustration, no. The way I see it, the errors are mine, so the only person I can legitimately get annoyed at is me! Not that I don’t get annoyed with myself quite often, come to think of it . . .
Wordhelper – You know, I could write an entire dissertation on why writers need editors, but my small post will have to do for now. (Thanks for suggesting it’s enough!) As for the issue of authors needing to be published . . . hmmm, a tricky one that. I have a PhD in composition, but the only piece of music of mine that ever got published was something I wrote in high school. I hate to think that it is that piece that qualifies me to call myself a composer, you know? (Not that I compose anymore, but you get the idea.) At the same time, I have met a lot of people who have started (and never finished) writing a book, so there’s definitely a hurdle to be overcome there. I’m just grateful I’m at the “published” end of the equation, as life is definitely better here!
Editdebs – I’m so sorry to hear that you’re ever referred to as the enemy of the writer. That’s the polar opposite of my experience. Perhaps, being immersed in children’s literature, I’ve got a slightly warped notion of the writer-editor relationship, but all my fellow YA authors seem to adore their editors too. Certainly, I think it should be a vital and energizing relationship, as long as there is trust and openness, and (from time to time) gratitude for what each other brings to the table. Or maybe I’ve just been lucky in my editor, copyeditor, cover designer, etc! Anyway, thank you for doing your best to improve the work of my fellow authors – I appreciate it every time I read someone else’s books.
Q: How many copyeditors does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Copyeditors do not change lightbulbs. They query them.
It sounds like you have found a good fit with your editors. This is the benefit we all work toward. It is wonderful to hear about positive experiences.
Other writers, however, might feel that the suggested changes you shared were pedantic, ruin the flow, and destroy the comedic timing. There is nothing wrong with letting the audience fill in details (such as that the two must have shaken hands before). And while grammarians might cringe and wonder who is drenched in sweat, I don’t think readers are quite so stupid as to miss the intent.
Some editors feel that the purpose of grammar is to make the intent clear, and that any other application is just bullying.
I’m sure you can tell by my post that I am no grammarian. Because of this, I greatly appreciate my own editors who polish my (and my authors’) prose and save us from embarrassment. I have certainly learned from them; including learning when NOT to flog the “rules.”
I had a good copyeditor for my book. She certainly not only caught typos but made some very good catches I hadn’t expected, like clarifying something I explained about the Danish language, which I speak but certainly didn’t expect my copyeditor to speak as well. She should have gotten a little bonus for fixing in two languages
That said, she made some bad catches too, “correcting” things that weren’t wrong. And since my book is about language (and also about where rules come from, and also about what our language attitudes say about us) it was a slightly testy process. I dug in my heels a few times, and to their credit while I tried not to over-stet, my editors accepted my calls when I did.
I come down as a descriptivist mainly, meaning not that there are no rules, but that they come from the body of English writers and speakers; the rules of quality written English can be found in quality writing over the past few centuries. But a certain kind of copyeditor thinks that the best editor is the one that fixes the most things. This can mean overenforcing “rules” that are not rules.
You’ve got an example here. A rhetorical question is one not meant to be answered, not one that should receive no response at all. When Dylan sings “how many roads must a man walk down?” he doesn’t want you to shout “forty-two!”, but he does want you to sway along and clap at the end. A sympathetic nod is a perfectly acceptable response to a rhetorical question
I had a little more to say here.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/johnson/2010/07/copy-editing
[...] Praise for Editors 9 05 2011 It’s really refreshing to read a post like this one, which acknowledges the great things a copy editor can do for a manuscript. A copy editor truly can [...]
[...] “hidden” perks of being an author. A few months ago I singled out the joy of having a top-notch copyeditor, Regina Castillo, to make me look far more literate than I actually am. Getting packages of books [...]
[...] WEBSITE BONUS: Antony wrote a great blog post a while back called In praise of copyeditors. All writers know what he means, [...]