It’s all about the reader

Alex Belth posted his Q&A with one of my favorite authors, Pete Dexter, on Bronx Banter almost a year ago. I didn’t see the interview until this weekend, but it’s worth sharing. Of course, I’m biased.

In his conversation with Belth and elsewhere, Dexter mentions the importance of storytelling and his desire to be entertained by what he reads rather than dazzled by beautiful writing:

…to me that’s the definition of what it is to be a serious writer. Which is to be good enough to talk about what you’re talking about without being so good that it’s all about your brilliance.

Editors at publishing houses are likely to agree. Their primary obligation, many would say, is to readers. As intermediaries whose job is to improve on writers’ efforts, they can face obstinacy that undermines the collaboration.

Writers can try to avoid severe editing by learning to read their own work with fresh eyes. Good critique partners also help, because they can detect problems long before the author considers his or her work finished. The amount of effort invested in revision based on feedback from impartial early readers of a manuscript can mean the difference between a dilettante and a professional writer.

A novelist’s guidebook

Thriller writer J.A. Konrath has organized the information posted on his blog—about writing, book publishing, marketing, and promotion—and made it available as a free ebook. The Newbie’s Guide to Publishing Book can be downloaded in PDF.

Along with scores of other tips in his guide, Konrath suggests four good methods to help you edit your own writing and outlines a critiquing worksheet used to determine whether a story is publishable. If you’re serious about writing fiction, I urge you to get a copy of his ebook. Konrath is frank, and he speaks from experience. Here’s just one example of his observations about making a living as a writer: “I’ve talked money with a few close writing friends, and I’ve learned something pretty shocking; there’s no rhyme, reason, or sense as to who gets paid what and why.”

Stet

Every cubicle has its dog-eared, photocopied bit of humor thumbtacked to the divider. These are two of my favorites.

The first is courtesy of my former colleague Tim Huston. Heaven only knows what unit he’s currently assigned to, but if his sons haven’t yet graduated from high school, it’s probably third shift. Huston wasn’t the originator, but he recited this from memory during a discussion of handwritten witness statements. I never met a detective who relied heavily on witnesses or suspects to write their own statements, as is so often depicted on television. This could be why:

 

In The Copyeditor’s Handbook, Amy Einsohn recalls this bulletin seen posted in publishing offices worldwide:

 

When editing defies categorization

An author of several nonfiction books recently spoke to me about editing his crime novel. He explained the book’s plot in detail. I suspect he’ll have no trouble convincing an agent of his book’s commercial appeal, if he can write it. After reading a few pages of his incomplete manuscript, it became clear that we’d been talking about editing when what he probably required was a creative collaborator or coauthor. [Updated on January 8, 2009: When I was a freelance copyeditor, I offered] I offer ghostwriting as a service but had never considered it synonymous with collaboration.

Attempting to categorize different types of editing is essentially futile, because a proposal for line editing can easily mushroom into substantive editing. There’s a significant difference between copyediting and proofreading, for example, but it can be pointless to make the distinction when most people use the words interchangeably.

Copyediting is the term used for polishing a manuscript by correcting punctuation, spelling, grammar, style, inconsistencies, and factual errors. There are various types or levels of editing. The more severe and time-consuming the work is, the more expensive it becomes.

Proofreading, also known as line editing, usually involves comparing word for word a text that is ready for publication (often referred to as a printer’s proof or a proof copy) with the version that was previously copyedited. A proofreader marks any differences, formatting flaws, and typographical errors for correction without regard to the writing’s literary value.

Some editors eschew the definitions, while others outline their own specifications or simply charge by the hour instead of by the word. There are editors who offer workshops and serve as writing coaches, and many editors are also capable writers.

I decided to ask other freelancers what they thought about the difference between copyediting and collaboration and how they would work with an author like the crime novelist.

Dianne and Liz Lorang are co-owners of The Write Help, a freelance editing and writing business in Littleton, Colorado. They offered me their opinions of how editing, ghostwriting, and collaboration differ:

Editing is correcting/improving what someone else has written and includes content editing, line-by-line editing, copyediting, and proofreading.

Ghostwriting is writing something for someone else, usually from scratch and usually letting them take all the credit.

Collaboration is working together on a project more or less as equals. For example, writing a book or screenplay together is a collaboration if one person does most of the writing while another does most of the research or marketing, or any combination of tasks involved in such a project.

Collaboration often starts in the initial stages with discussion of the basics, such as the pitch or plot of the book or screenplay. It then moves on to dividing tasks according to individual abilities. Other times, however, a collaboration starts when someone has an idea but needs more input, such as from an expert or a specialist who has something unique to bring to the project. This differs from hiring editors or ghostwriters, who often receive nothing more than compensation for their work. In other words, collaboration usually means getting credit for one’s contribution as well as a share in the profits.

While an editor’s work may elude strict categorization, freelance copyeditor and fantasy author Deanna Hoak quips, “It does take a certain personality.” For deeper insight into what copyeditors actually do with a manuscript and how they do it, read Hoak’s description of her process, a fine example of transparency.

Writers and editors need to be compatible but are often adversarial. Raymond Carver’s original manuscript for What We Talk About When We Talk About Love has been contrasted with the published version heavily edited by Gordon Lish. Seeing the two texts juxtaposed is disturbing, but it evinces the uneasy merger of writing and editing.

When I contacted consultant and writer Lee Down of One Man Can about coaching authors, he told me:

Well, it just so happens I’m working with a local writer here in Vancouver on his manuscript. He had the story pretty much written, the problem was everyone hated it. Having looked at it, I could see that he had been telling a story and trying to make a statement all at once; that’s where it fell apart.

Understanding the statement he was trying to make, I was able to coach him to write more into the development of the story so that the readers will actually experience the realization on their own. Readers, I’ve learnt the hard way, hate to be “told.”

Are screenwriters accustomed to creative collaborations that give form to plots or proposals they have no part in devising? I’d love to hear from someone who has taken part in a successful literary collaboration. I’d also be happy to convey contact information to the crime novelist, who may still be looking for a creative collaborator.