Editors

[sartorias]

While I was visiting asakiyume we had a small but excellent writing workshop. I came away all excited about what people had seen in my first chapter of a thing--the bad and the good. All during my travels I tinkered with that chapter, addressing issues that people saw, then I woke up the night before last and realized I have to scrap the entire thing except

Comments

[queenoftheskies]

Wonderful post at BVC. As an unpublished writer, I don't really have the experience to offer any comments there, but it has made me think.

[sartorias]

Thinking is what I hoped for, and the exchange of ideas.

[queenoftheskies]

I have often wondered if an agent was interested in one of my novels because of the idea, but wanted me to change key aspects whether I would make those changes or not.

I can tell you that a half dozen or more years ago, I would not have because I was probably still at the level where I thought it was all about the "initial" story and that everything should revolve around it.

Now that I've watched stories evolve as I write and rewrite, if someone sees something that could be stronger, better, I think I'd consider the changes.

However, as with Trolls, if they wanted to change the race of my main character, or if, with another novel, they wanted me to censor something I'd written that I felt was important (gay characters, for example), I can't tell you I'd be so open to those changes.

I suppose a person doesn't really know what they'd do until it happens, do they?

[sartorias]

Yeah--only the writer can see what would distort the story she is trying to tell. There are the suggested changes that can excite one, that open doors where one thought were walls, but then there are the changes for a myriad of other reasons that turn one cold.

Then there's the question of what is going to excite the greatest number of readers? No one is 100% effective at predicting that. And what works for one audience won't work for another--Fifty Shades of Grey looked utterly banal and boring to me, and I was so disappointed in P.D. James' Death at Pemberley--I thought it incompetent in every way, prose, characters, period detail, even the mystery--that I almost demanded my money back, something I can't remember doing before. Yet it is a best seller, which means it pleased a lot of people.

[mevennen]

What I have increasingly been hearing from other pro female writers is this. "My agent/editor/the sales team said:

'We really loved it but it's too unusual, so we're passing on it. But we're really looking forward to your next proposal.'

'What YA readers want is a YA Game of Thrones.'

'We really loved it but we don't know how to market it. Is it SF or fantasy?'

'We loved that your last series was so different, but in the next book, do you think you could put some dragons in?'

'It got great reviews but it didn't really sell, so we're dropping your next book.'

'Five years ago we would definitely have taken a chance on this [a fantasy with pirates] but now we can't risk it.'

And that, dear reader, is why I won't be writing any more novels in the forseeable future.

[sartorias]

Sigh.

Yeah, there's a lot of that going around . . . and so writers turn to the self-publishing route. Some are even finding success--though that is tougher when one is beginning. (But not totally impossible)

[houseboatonstyx]

Yes, I figured that people like Lawrence Block are happy with self-publishing because they already have enough fans from their traditional career (and/or they're recycling their backlist).

But I've seen accounts by some self-publishing authors who are making useful money without prior fame. I can't find the longer, better article with comments from haikujaguar and others, but here is one lead.
http://robertkroese.com/post/29453588293/almost-famous

[sartorias]

Some folks successfully find their niche market with the aid of other things--blogs, artwork, whatever. They might never become best sellers, but they are finding readers.

[asakiyume]

Funny, isn't it, how you can write and write and write . . . and then suddenly see it all needs to be scrapped and a new approach taken!

(Now I'm curious about the new first chapter!)

[sartorias]

:-)

[sartorias]

You guys are the awesomest!

[cmcmck]

Gatekeepers?

Now there's a word that really needs to be banned, but I suppose I would say that! :o)

Seriously though, even academic historical publishing now seems to have a paucity of good editors or in some cases, it seems, any editors! I'm reviewing more and more expensive and slender publications and finding myself asking if they ever saw proofreading or editing given the number of errors and the sheer amount of unecessary verbiage.

Academic vanity publishing is alive and well!