As both an editor and a literary agent, I see manuscripts all the time from authors who obviously did not prepare well. They neglected to consider a few things in their planning, if they did any planning at all. Here are some of the most common preparation oversights:
1. No outline - I know it is something we learned in school and no one likes to outline, but few authors are organized enough in their minds to plan an entire book in their head before writing it. And I don't care who the author is, outlining will help them get that book solidly planned so that it comes out looking and reading professional. If and author thinks that they don't need to outline or that outlining "cramps their style," then the author is deceiving themselves.
2. No character map - not many authors know about this little tool, but the best authors throughout history have had some form of character mapping done before they began writing. What is a character map? A character map is a set of pages (print or electronic) that lists the character's name at the top and then is a complete and total history of the character. This is done for major and minor/supporting characters. Without a character map of some kind, the author inevitably gets facts mixed up and the inconsistencies are hard to fix when they add to more and more inconsistencies. A character map takes a long time, but it "puts on paper" what the author is thinking about each character. This can also be done for places and events, by the way.
3. Not prepared to pay for editing - I cannot relate the number of times I have been hired to edit a manuscript after the author got someone else to edit the manuscript for free. If a person says they will edit for free, they are not a good editor. Some of us do this for a living and we do not do it for free. A good author will plan ahead and save money to pay for a professional, competent, and ethical editor to proofread and/or edit the manuscript. You cannot get good editing for free!
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
The Pronoun Envy Pandemic
As I sit here procrastinating (again) the doing of the work I make money at, I want to muse for a while about pronouns.
I had an 8th grade English teacher - Ms. Hansen - who influenced me more than I'll ever know. My colleague Koni Atencio and I took the class together, but I seem to remember more about the class than she does. Anyway...
Ms. Hansen taught us that one can become lazy with our use of language and in no place is this more evident than in the over-use of pronouns. I see manuscripts all the time where this is the case, and I call the phenomenon "Pronoun Envy." What is pronoun envy?
Pronoun Envy is when an author uses "he," "she," "him," "her," "his," and especially "it" as often as they can and do not use proper names or other nouns. Here is an example from an actual manuscript I read a few weeks ago:
John, Robert, Martha, and Elise were at the movies that night. He told her that she was too good for him, but she didn't think that his giving her peanuts and soda pop was a precursor to being asked out. After all, she didn't like it, anyway.
Which "he" and which "she" and which "her" and, most importantly for me, which "it"?
I could spend a long time dissecting this sentence for its errors, but let me concentrate on the pronoun envy for "it." The rule of language is that a pronoun refers back to the most recent noun. So "it" refers to "soda pop," but when you read the above example, you wonder whether "it" is supposed to be a pronoun for her (whoever she is) being asked out by him (whoever he is).
I see writing like this all the time, even in the many self-published books I get for my Kindle. This is lazy writing, just lazy! A good author, and their even better editor, should catch these pronoun envy problems and the errors should never make a final manuscript. If an author is serious about becoming a great author, then the author needs to learn from the mistakes and not be envious of pronouns in future writings.
I had an 8th grade English teacher - Ms. Hansen - who influenced me more than I'll ever know. My colleague Koni Atencio and I took the class together, but I seem to remember more about the class than she does. Anyway...
Ms. Hansen taught us that one can become lazy with our use of language and in no place is this more evident than in the over-use of pronouns. I see manuscripts all the time where this is the case, and I call the phenomenon "Pronoun Envy." What is pronoun envy?
Pronoun Envy is when an author uses "he," "she," "him," "her," "his," and especially "it" as often as they can and do not use proper names or other nouns. Here is an example from an actual manuscript I read a few weeks ago:
John, Robert, Martha, and Elise were at the movies that night. He told her that she was too good for him, but she didn't think that his giving her peanuts and soda pop was a precursor to being asked out. After all, she didn't like it, anyway.
Which "he" and which "she" and which "her" and, most importantly for me, which "it"?
I could spend a long time dissecting this sentence for its errors, but let me concentrate on the pronoun envy for "it." The rule of language is that a pronoun refers back to the most recent noun. So "it" refers to "soda pop," but when you read the above example, you wonder whether "it" is supposed to be a pronoun for her (whoever she is) being asked out by him (whoever he is).
I see writing like this all the time, even in the many self-published books I get for my Kindle. This is lazy writing, just lazy! A good author, and their even better editor, should catch these pronoun envy problems and the errors should never make a final manuscript. If an author is serious about becoming a great author, then the author needs to learn from the mistakes and not be envious of pronouns in future writings.
Friday, June 22, 2012
Positive Thinking or Derangement?
At least once a week, I am contacted by an author who claims that their latest novel is a New York Times bestseller. Given that I make money by 1) editing these manuscripts and/or 2) signing an agency contract with these authors, I have to always bite my tongue in regard to such statements.
I read two to four manuscripts a week, hoping that I'll get to edit them, but that rarely happens. Instead, I read these tomes for evaluation for representation. Although there are some good ones, I have only read four possible bestsellers in the past nine months, and I represent all those authors.
But I wonder if this stance by authors is positive thinking, with a lot of hope build in, or whether the authors actually believe that they have written a bestseller? When I evaluate a manuscript, I look for 1) publish-ability and 2) sale-ability. In other words, is the time I am going to put into representing this author and their book, which can amount to a hundred hours or more if I am not the editor? Am I going to eventually make such money?
I evaluate a manuscript on a simple 1 to 10 scale. If it is an 8, 9, or 10, I offer to represent the author. If it is a 5, 6, or 7, I offer suggestions for improvement and offer to look at the manuscript again when the author cleans it up. If it is less than a 5, I thank the author, offer suggestions, and leave the matter alone.
Because my literary agency division is predicated on the Jerry McGuire principle and I represent less than twenty authors at a time, I have to be picky. I have read ten authors with an 8, 9, or 10 (in my opinion) out of about eighty who have submitted to me. I am picky, yes. But my authors are getting published.
Literary agents have a hard enough time already if we don't have to constantly have to find tactful ways to tell an author that, no, it isn't a bestseller.
I read two to four manuscripts a week, hoping that I'll get to edit them, but that rarely happens. Instead, I read these tomes for evaluation for representation. Although there are some good ones, I have only read four possible bestsellers in the past nine months, and I represent all those authors.
But I wonder if this stance by authors is positive thinking, with a lot of hope build in, or whether the authors actually believe that they have written a bestseller? When I evaluate a manuscript, I look for 1) publish-ability and 2) sale-ability. In other words, is the time I am going to put into representing this author and their book, which can amount to a hundred hours or more if I am not the editor? Am I going to eventually make such money?
I evaluate a manuscript on a simple 1 to 10 scale. If it is an 8, 9, or 10, I offer to represent the author. If it is a 5, 6, or 7, I offer suggestions for improvement and offer to look at the manuscript again when the author cleans it up. If it is less than a 5, I thank the author, offer suggestions, and leave the matter alone.
Because my literary agency division is predicated on the Jerry McGuire principle and I represent less than twenty authors at a time, I have to be picky. I have read ten authors with an 8, 9, or 10 (in my opinion) out of about eighty who have submitted to me. I am picky, yes. But my authors are getting published.
Literary agents have a hard enough time already if we don't have to constantly have to find tactful ways to tell an author that, no, it isn't a bestseller.
Friday, June 15, 2012
THAT
As a lover of the English language, I am always astounded at how many instances of the word "that" that I have to insert into authors' writings. I do it all the time!
What happened to make the word "that" an endangered species in our language? It is such a wonderful word and it tells us so much.
I learned that in some sub-dialects of American English, such as in the Northeast and Northwest of the United States, that the word "that" is not used in speech, thus writers do not use it in writing. I also have discovered that the word is omitted by line editors for television and radio commercials and that this followed on the elimination of the word in telephone operators' greetings and replies. I guess AT&T, at one time, schooled its operators to NOT use the word "that," even when that was the right word to use.
The word "that" is most commonly used, needed, as an adverb. But that is exactly when it is taken out of writing.
My fellow editor at JLS, Koni Atencio, says I have a fixation with the word "that," but that is okay with me! It is such a cool word that I don't mind being teased about it.
Did you know that you can use the word "that" four times in a row in a sentence and it is grammatically correct? My eighth grade English teacher, Ms. Hanson, told us this at the beginning of the year and promised she would write the sentence on the board before we finished the class, but she never did. It took me nearly 25 more years to figure it out for myself. Here goes:
After seeing the balloon rise up into the sky, he was wondering why that that that that happened so easily and swiftly.
Yes, that is grammatically correct. You word gurus, break it down and diagram it. You'll see.
We need two things, in my opinion. The first is a national organization devoted to saving the word "that" and the second is a National That Day to celebrate this wonderful word. Who will join me in the Crusade for That?
What happened to make the word "that" an endangered species in our language? It is such a wonderful word and it tells us so much.
I learned that in some sub-dialects of American English, such as in the Northeast and Northwest of the United States, that the word "that" is not used in speech, thus writers do not use it in writing. I also have discovered that the word is omitted by line editors for television and radio commercials and that this followed on the elimination of the word in telephone operators' greetings and replies. I guess AT&T, at one time, schooled its operators to NOT use the word "that," even when that was the right word to use.
The word "that" is most commonly used, needed, as an adverb. But that is exactly when it is taken out of writing.
My fellow editor at JLS, Koni Atencio, says I have a fixation with the word "that," but that is okay with me! It is such a cool word that I don't mind being teased about it.
Did you know that you can use the word "that" four times in a row in a sentence and it is grammatically correct? My eighth grade English teacher, Ms. Hanson, told us this at the beginning of the year and promised she would write the sentence on the board before we finished the class, but she never did. It took me nearly 25 more years to figure it out for myself. Here goes:
After seeing the balloon rise up into the sky, he was wondering why that that that that happened so easily and swiftly.
Yes, that is grammatically correct. You word gurus, break it down and diagram it. You'll see.
We need two things, in my opinion. The first is a national organization devoted to saving the word "that" and the second is a National That Day to celebrate this wonderful word. Who will join me in the Crusade for That?
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Editing is Hard Work, So Pay Your Editors!!!
"I spend too much time editing." That is a common thought of mine, sometimes even a verbal statement (though I live alone and no one hears me). But it really is hard work, even if I am just doing basic proofreading.
To start things off, I may not really be "into" the topic of what I'm reading. I have no-nos that I won't edit: crimes against children, horror stories (they give me nightmares), and erotica. But sometimes I'm just not really interested in that piece on FOREX trading or that romance novel. So in those times, when I am not interested, I have a tendency to "fall asleep at the wheel," and it is even more important than ever to have right on my desktop (I use two monitors) my code of ethics, which says I will be honest and complete in the editing services I provide. That wakes me up and I continue, often actually becoming interested in what I am reading, after all.
So it is really hard for me, as a person who makes a living doing this editing stuff, to see Craigslist ads that say "no pay" or "this is a nonpaying job" or "I'll give you credit in the book." What? This is a job, not a hobby. I worked long hours for years to perfect my writing (as much as that is possible) to make myself an above average editor. I don't want to get paid by getting credit in your book, I get that, anyway, from others who pay me to edit their books.
A few months ago, I even had a woman call me and talk to me for almost an hour about editing her manuscript, only to have her say after wasting an hour of my precious phone minutes that her pay to me was going to be changing the name of one of the characters in the book to my name. I laughed out loud, thanked her for her time, and told her that if she wasn't going to pay me, then I wasn't going to edit for her.
My biggest advice to authors, whether you want to be published by a reputable publisher or go the self-publishing route, is to recognize that 1) you probably need an editor and 2) editing services cost money. So while you are writing, whether for hobby or to build yourself as a professional writer, you need to save some money to pay for editing services once you are finished.
I looked at the statistics. In the past year and six months, I have edited 84 books. Of those, 83 needed editing and only one needed light proofreading. As a literary agent, I have gotten five of these books published, eleven more have been published by publishers, and the rest have been self-published. One author, who has let me edit five of her books now (or is it six?) is on a best seller list somewhere. But if I had not edited her books, would she be?
Pay your editors, please. You won't regret it, I promise.
To start things off, I may not really be "into" the topic of what I'm reading. I have no-nos that I won't edit: crimes against children, horror stories (they give me nightmares), and erotica. But sometimes I'm just not really interested in that piece on FOREX trading or that romance novel. So in those times, when I am not interested, I have a tendency to "fall asleep at the wheel," and it is even more important than ever to have right on my desktop (I use two monitors) my code of ethics, which says I will be honest and complete in the editing services I provide. That wakes me up and I continue, often actually becoming interested in what I am reading, after all.
So it is really hard for me, as a person who makes a living doing this editing stuff, to see Craigslist ads that say "no pay" or "this is a nonpaying job" or "I'll give you credit in the book." What? This is a job, not a hobby. I worked long hours for years to perfect my writing (as much as that is possible) to make myself an above average editor. I don't want to get paid by getting credit in your book, I get that, anyway, from others who pay me to edit their books.
A few months ago, I even had a woman call me and talk to me for almost an hour about editing her manuscript, only to have her say after wasting an hour of my precious phone minutes that her pay to me was going to be changing the name of one of the characters in the book to my name. I laughed out loud, thanked her for her time, and told her that if she wasn't going to pay me, then I wasn't going to edit for her.
My biggest advice to authors, whether you want to be published by a reputable publisher or go the self-publishing route, is to recognize that 1) you probably need an editor and 2) editing services cost money. So while you are writing, whether for hobby or to build yourself as a professional writer, you need to save some money to pay for editing services once you are finished.
I looked at the statistics. In the past year and six months, I have edited 84 books. Of those, 83 needed editing and only one needed light proofreading. As a literary agent, I have gotten five of these books published, eleven more have been published by publishers, and the rest have been self-published. One author, who has let me edit five of her books now (or is it six?) is on a best seller list somewhere. But if I had not edited her books, would she be?
Pay your editors, please. You won't regret it, I promise.
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Ebooks, Good or Bad?
I am still a lover of the paper book. I love the smell and feel of the pages and the beauty of the binding, even if it is a mass market novel. I think I will always want to have a paper book around to read. I sure don't know how my religious devotions would fare with an ebook - I tried the Bible on Kindle and I just couldn't make it work for me.
But I see people I know and people I don't really getting into ebooks. I myself love to read the ebooks I purchase. But I have some doubts about the statistics.
In April, I read a statistic from the "Big 6" publishers in the U.S. that said that from February 2010 to February 2011, sales of print books was down 46% and sales of ebooks was up 150%. That translates to print books going from 100 to 54 and ebooks going from 100 to 150. I don't dispute the statistics, I just dispute the meanings.
I remember fondly in 2006 and 2007, while in library school, my friends and I going to the local Barnes & Noble (and then me to the Books-a-Million alone) and browsing the hundreds and hundreds of titles they had on the bargain book tables. These were books that they could not sell at full price and had to sell at insane discounts like $1 and $2 and $5. From February 2006 to May 2007, I remember seeing the same titles on these tables - they just were not selling.
I think what really happened in America is that the number of readers increased with Generation X and Generation Y coming of age as adult, but the number of book buyers decreased a lot, too. The fact of more readers made the print publishers publish more and more titles, but there were just not book buyers out there. This was, I believe, because these new buyers were not really readers, just eligible readers. They had stopped reading.
When I was teaching college classes to Freshmen, I asked them, every semester, how many had read a book in the last six months that was not assigned for a class. Invariably, out of a class of 30, only 2 or 3 would raise their hands. See, I think that that Generation X and Generation Y were not trained to be readers. Their attention span is too short for them to actually read a book. Sure, they'll read magazine articles and Facebook posts, but not long books.
Then, ta da! The advent of the ebook and the ereader. Then sales started picking up because a reader could buy short or long books for as low as $0.99 (some even free!) and read what they wanted to read when they wanted to read. They could polish off a short story in a few minutes and say they had read a "book." Print publishers cannot publish individual stories by themselves, but ebooks can be individual short stories. So if I read one book of ten short stories in print, I read one book; but if I read ten short stories in ebook format, I can claim to have read ten books.
The reason ebook sales have gone up, I believe, is because few, regardless of generation, wants to read a print book anymore. An ebook will do. Print book sales went down not only because of the lack of new print book readers, but because ebooks are cheaper and easier to manipulate for the wireless generation we live in.
So ebooks, are they the future? Yes, in part. But I think print books will still be around, just in smaller numbers.
But I see people I know and people I don't really getting into ebooks. I myself love to read the ebooks I purchase. But I have some doubts about the statistics.
In April, I read a statistic from the "Big 6" publishers in the U.S. that said that from February 2010 to February 2011, sales of print books was down 46% and sales of ebooks was up 150%. That translates to print books going from 100 to 54 and ebooks going from 100 to 150. I don't dispute the statistics, I just dispute the meanings.
I remember fondly in 2006 and 2007, while in library school, my friends and I going to the local Barnes & Noble (and then me to the Books-a-Million alone) and browsing the hundreds and hundreds of titles they had on the bargain book tables. These were books that they could not sell at full price and had to sell at insane discounts like $1 and $2 and $5. From February 2006 to May 2007, I remember seeing the same titles on these tables - they just were not selling.
I think what really happened in America is that the number of readers increased with Generation X and Generation Y coming of age as adult, but the number of book buyers decreased a lot, too. The fact of more readers made the print publishers publish more and more titles, but there were just not book buyers out there. This was, I believe, because these new buyers were not really readers, just eligible readers. They had stopped reading.
When I was teaching college classes to Freshmen, I asked them, every semester, how many had read a book in the last six months that was not assigned for a class. Invariably, out of a class of 30, only 2 or 3 would raise their hands. See, I think that that Generation X and Generation Y were not trained to be readers. Their attention span is too short for them to actually read a book. Sure, they'll read magazine articles and Facebook posts, but not long books.
Then, ta da! The advent of the ebook and the ereader. Then sales started picking up because a reader could buy short or long books for as low as $0.99 (some even free!) and read what they wanted to read when they wanted to read. They could polish off a short story in a few minutes and say they had read a "book." Print publishers cannot publish individual stories by themselves, but ebooks can be individual short stories. So if I read one book of ten short stories in print, I read one book; but if I read ten short stories in ebook format, I can claim to have read ten books.
The reason ebook sales have gone up, I believe, is because few, regardless of generation, wants to read a print book anymore. An ebook will do. Print book sales went down not only because of the lack of new print book readers, but because ebooks are cheaper and easier to manipulate for the wireless generation we live in.
So ebooks, are they the future? Yes, in part. But I think print books will still be around, just in smaller numbers.
Friday, December 23, 2011
Christmas Tribute to Oldtime Editors
I cannot imagine what editing was like before computers. An editor had to take a red pen and go through a hand-written manuscript and make editor's marks (which I still love!) to make corrections. Then the author went through the same pages and accepted or rejected the editorial suggestions.
When I think of the length of manuscripts written by great authors like Dickens and Tolstoy, the editing job must have been frustrating and tedious. I have it easy by editing on a computer. Even if it is a PDF that I have to create a TXT file writing out the suggestions, my job is still so much easier.
St. Francis de Sales is the patron saint of editors for Catholics. Imagine what his editors had to go through; he was a prolific writer himself.
So this Christmas weekend, I will raise a toast to editors of old for trailblazing the profession I now practice.
When I think of the length of manuscripts written by great authors like Dickens and Tolstoy, the editing job must have been frustrating and tedious. I have it easy by editing on a computer. Even if it is a PDF that I have to create a TXT file writing out the suggestions, my job is still so much easier.
St. Francis de Sales is the patron saint of editors for Catholics. Imagine what his editors had to go through; he was a prolific writer himself.
So this Christmas weekend, I will raise a toast to editors of old for trailblazing the profession I now practice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)