Book Discussion: Terri Windling & Editing
For the next two weeks, we're going to take a bit of a detour as we discuss Terri Windling's influence on fantasy and speculative fiction. In the 1980s, Terri was a fantasy editor for Tor and Ace, and created the Fairy Tale and Borderlands series. In addition, Terri has co-edited numerous anthologies of magical fiction such as the Year's Best Fantasy and Horror and The Faery Reel: Tales from the Twilight Realm.
This week, I would like to focus on the Fairy Tale series in order to examine editors and editing. This post was inspired by the acknowledgments section in Pamela Dean's Tam Lin, edited by Terri, where Dean describes the novel as a "rusher-off" as opposed to one re-written and polished over a long period of time. But don't all novels go through an editor, I wondered? Aren't editors known for their skill, for, well, editing?
In my humble exposure to the topic--primarily as a reader of books and blogs more than experience or acquaintance with editors--I've concluded that people have as many opinions about editing as they do about writing. Some things I did notice, however, were:
1) Every editor is different,
2) Every editor-author relationship is different,
3) It is possible for a manuscript to undergo an infinite amount of revisions, and get better with every edit,
4) Publishing houses must prioritize sales and profit in order to stay in business.
I often think about 3) and the idea that editing a manuscript is a function approaching an asymptote, like this:
Realistically, point 4), time and sanity prevent many editors from editing a manuscript forever, even if it does improve with every revision. At some point, an editor just has to let it go, because no one makes any money while a manuscript is still in the editing stage.
So, what makes an editor different from another editor? For acquisitions editors like Terri, it's their taste--what they choose to buy, which authors they choose to support, which themes they invest time and effort in, and what agents, authors and other editors see them buying. An editor's reputation is built upon what they acquire, not, as I mistakenly assumed, how they edit.
Terri accomplished a number of things with the Fairy Tale series. Every book in the series is a self-contained, individual contribution with no cross-over characters or setting. One is a retelling of a ballad set in a liberal arts college (Dean's Tam Lin), another is a more traditional, historical fairy tale retelling (Wrede's Snow White and Rose Red) and one even uses a fairy tale as a metaphor for struggling artists (Brust's The Sun, the Moon and the Stars). The novels have no connection to one another except for Terri's involvement in their publication, and that they all reinterpret a fairy tale or ballad.
Plus, if we think about publishing from a business standpoint, publishers of genre fiction make a lot of money on series, and fantasy is no exception (just think about how many trilogies there are!). Readers enjoy the familiarity of a beloved character or setting, and will buy the next installment so long as they are engaged. In the case of the Fairy Tale series, the common features aren't settings or characters, but an editor's unique taste. Terri became known for her work on mythic fiction and fairy tale retellings.
Finally, editors are also known for helping launch an author's career. Some editor-author relationships are special, and it is not uncommon for an author to follow an editor to a different publishing house. If we look through Terri's bibliography, especially among the contributors to anthologies and series, many of the authors have worked with Terri before: Emma Bull, Pamela Dean--and pretty much all of the Scribblies! plus Jane Yolen, Ellen Kushner and Charles De Lint, among many more.
So, what do you all think? Agree with some points or am I completely off the mark?
Can you think of some other editors who have a unique literary flavour? Do you ever pick up a book and go, "Oh, this was definitely edited by so-and-so"? If the answer is yes, that editor might already have their own imprint. Or you may be like most of my friends, who enjoy books but don't notice editors at all!
Particularly for books in a series: do you think books should be edited more rigorously for content and style, or is it more important that you get the next book as soon as possible? Think Harry--three years was already a long time to wait between books, so imagine if it had gone through a million revisions.
If you write, what do you look for and expect in an editor? I've often heard that during the submission process, it isn't just whether or not your writing is good, but whether you get matched with an editor who believes in your book and invests the time and effort to see it through to publication. Editors' tastes, like readers', vary wildly!
Next week: anthologies!
Best,
Faye
This week, I would like to focus on the Fairy Tale series in order to examine editors and editing. This post was inspired by the acknowledgments section in Pamela Dean's Tam Lin, edited by Terri, where Dean describes the novel as a "rusher-off" as opposed to one re-written and polished over a long period of time. But don't all novels go through an editor, I wondered? Aren't editors known for their skill, for, well, editing?
In my humble exposure to the topic--primarily as a reader of books and blogs more than experience or acquaintance with editors--I've concluded that people have as many opinions about editing as they do about writing. Some things I did notice, however, were:
1) Every editor is different,
2) Every editor-author relationship is different,
3) It is possible for a manuscript to undergo an infinite amount of revisions, and get better with every edit,
4) Publishing houses must prioritize sales and profit in order to stay in business.
I often think about 3) and the idea that editing a manuscript is a function approaching an asymptote, like this:
Realistically, point 4), time and sanity prevent many editors from editing a manuscript forever, even if it does improve with every revision. At some point, an editor just has to let it go, because no one makes any money while a manuscript is still in the editing stage.
So, what makes an editor different from another editor? For acquisitions editors like Terri, it's their taste--what they choose to buy, which authors they choose to support, which themes they invest time and effort in, and what agents, authors and other editors see them buying. An editor's reputation is built upon what they acquire, not, as I mistakenly assumed, how they edit.
Terri accomplished a number of things with the Fairy Tale series. Every book in the series is a self-contained, individual contribution with no cross-over characters or setting. One is a retelling of a ballad set in a liberal arts college (Dean's Tam Lin), another is a more traditional, historical fairy tale retelling (Wrede's Snow White and Rose Red) and one even uses a fairy tale as a metaphor for struggling artists (Brust's The Sun, the Moon and the Stars). The novels have no connection to one another except for Terri's involvement in their publication, and that they all reinterpret a fairy tale or ballad.
Plus, if we think about publishing from a business standpoint, publishers of genre fiction make a lot of money on series, and fantasy is no exception (just think about how many trilogies there are!). Readers enjoy the familiarity of a beloved character or setting, and will buy the next installment so long as they are engaged. In the case of the Fairy Tale series, the common features aren't settings or characters, but an editor's unique taste. Terri became known for her work on mythic fiction and fairy tale retellings.
Finally, editors are also known for helping launch an author's career. Some editor-author relationships are special, and it is not uncommon for an author to follow an editor to a different publishing house. If we look through Terri's bibliography, especially among the contributors to anthologies and series, many of the authors have worked with Terri before: Emma Bull, Pamela Dean--and pretty much all of the Scribblies! plus Jane Yolen, Ellen Kushner and Charles De Lint, among many more.
So, what do you all think? Agree with some points or am I completely off the mark?
Can you think of some other editors who have a unique literary flavour? Do you ever pick up a book and go, "Oh, this was definitely edited by so-and-so"? If the answer is yes, that editor might already have their own imprint. Or you may be like most of my friends, who enjoy books but don't notice editors at all!
Particularly for books in a series: do you think books should be edited more rigorously for content and style, or is it more important that you get the next book as soon as possible? Think Harry--three years was already a long time to wait between books, so imagine if it had gone through a million revisions.
If you write, what do you look for and expect in an editor? I've often heard that during the submission process, it isn't just whether or not your writing is good, but whether you get matched with an editor who believes in your book and invests the time and effort to see it through to publication. Editors' tastes, like readers', vary wildly!
Next week: anthologies!
Best,
Faye