(Untitled)

[sartorias]

The unnamed agency in our previous post has chosen to come forward to present their perception of our exchange. We confirm that it was the agency we referred to. We stand by every word we wrote in our original article

Comments

[anderyn]

This whole situation is extremely upsetting -- one person that I really like (you) is being called a liar and an opportunist and people are jumping on the bandwagon. While I know I don't know you in person, I do think I have enough of a sense of your innate honesty that I know those accusations are wrong. But this is like the whole racefail issue -- people get on one side or another, and assume that the other side is wrong wrong wrong. And then we're all polarized. I hate that. This issue is much more complex than you lying or them lying -- or even a miscommunication in which you heard "a" and they said "b". It's about a whole paradigm of publishing which thinks that whitewashing characters on covers is good, so more people will buy the book; or that having a gay main character is bad, because less people will buy the book. I think they are underestimating the power of new and exciting and diverse characters to draw in readers. I know that I, as a reader, want to read something that's interesting and different and not just the same as the last twenty books -- I still have my biases for happy endings, mind you, but I'd like the road to be as different and divergent as it can be.

Do not that I am not saying that the person who posted the agency's rebuttal is wrong, because I am sure that the people in question also do not feel that they were doing anything evil. But of course that's the problem. Privilege. And unthinking assumptions. "Well, we can't be homophobic, so their book must suck."

[sartorias]

I sure hope that things get back to focusing on the problem. And there is a problem, or the response would not have been so overwhelming.

[akirlu]

And there is a problem, or the response would not have been so overwhelming.

I don't think that quite follows. There may well be a problem, I'm not saying there isn't, but I can posit plausible alternate reasons for the overwhelming response.

[beth_bernobich]

To me it follows because I saw "overwhelming response" refer to the number of other writers who said, "Yes, an editor/agent told me to make my gay character straight." (Though yes, there was a general overwhelming response.)

[beth_bernobich]

I know authors who had their gay character changed to straight in copyedits. I know other authors who were explicitly told by agents to change their gay character to straight. Some did, and the novel sold. Some did not, fired their agent, and went on to sell their novel.

[beth_bernobich]

They posted in comments on the original PW article. Some gave their names (Nicola Griffith) and some did not.

[teacup_werewolf]

What book had queer romance, funny since I love Bordertown and I've been curious on reading more of your stuff?

[ellen_datlow]

A copy editor made that kind of change and wasn't told by the editor and the author to back off? That's not how copyediting works. Copy editors have NO power in the editing process. Final word is author's at that stage of the production process.

[ellen_datlow]

That was meant to respond to Beth's post but it didn't go where it was supposed to...

[mme_hardy]

I wish that were true. I'm aware of an author, Caridad Ferrer -- she blogged about it -- whose copyeditor went through her novel Adiós to my Old Life and corrected all the author's idiomatic, native-speaker, Cuban Spanish to high-school Spanish. Caridad didn't see the changes until the book was in print.

http://jenniferechols.livejournal.com/30312.html?thread=194408#t194408

[ellen_datlow]

Copy editors sometimes overstep their jobs and it's the editor's job to ensure 1) that copy editors do not edit the material but fix punctuation, query grammar that isn't "voice", and do some fact checking when necessary and 2) that the copy edited ms gets to the author in a timely manner in order to stet or make other changes. Ultimately the publisher is at fault.

I see from Caridad's blog post that the book was copy edited after she signed off on the galleys. That' just wrong. I hope her agent reamed out everyone at the publisher who let that happen.

[beth_bernobich]

It was the editor who made those changes. I just double-checked, and it was *after* the author had reviewed the copyedits. Luckily the author caught the changes in first pass proofs.

[ellen_datlow]

Aighhhh. That really sucks. It's really important to be able to trust your editor. I'm glad the author was able to change everything back in time--and assume that the author has never worked with the editor again.