| Author |
Message |
    
Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 6026
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 02:21 pm: | 
|
I'd say there might be various good reasons to slash up to 50% of somebody's MSS--but when you cut 70% you just didn't like it--
Lish had Carver over a barrell cuz Carver was broke and a drunk and Lish held the keys to Esquire magazine--in those days a career maker
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/12/24/071224fa_fact
|
Emanuel
Veteran Poster
Username: Emanuel
Post Number: 462
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 03:08 pm: |
|
Nice article Chris. Thanks for the link. I guess it becomes a question of perhaps not getting published in order to keep your work intact or accepting the editorial changes in order to receive the accolades and payments for your work. 70% would probably make your work unrecognizable though. It looks like Lish basically took Carver's idea and re-wrote them to his liking. But where would Carver had been without Lish's help?
I've never had that privilege of having a complete manuscript ripped to shreads through editing and then traditionally published. I don't know if it still happens as drastically today but I'm eager to find out from firsthand experience. I'm sure some authors in Carver's day would have killed to be in the very same position. Nowadays, authors just say, "Screw it! I'll publish the damn thing myself." Then they slide down the slippery slope of non-traditional publishing. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 11020
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 04:06 pm: |
|
I guess I am among the few writers whose work people critique as being too short. But I am a firm believer of never using 2 words when one will do, and as far as being detailed-oriented, I like to leave things to the reader's imagination. I have come to think of myself as a lazy writer, one who conveniently dismisses others as self-indulgent. And having slid down the slippery slope of non-traditional publishing, I am now lanquishing here, steeped in apathy. 
|
A_womon
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: A_womon
Post Number: 2036
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 05:30 pm: |
|
Emanuel,
As you know, I went the traditional publishing route and the edits that were suggested by my editors, were no where near 70 per cent. As you pointed out, editing at that level would amount to the editor(s) rewriting the entire manuscript and with the number of submissions coming across thier desks these days, a busy editor doesn't have time to spend that much time and effort on one acquisition.
Maybe back in the day when things weren't as hectic and a manuscript took a lot longer to complete an editor could do something like this, but I doubt if it would happen now.
Also, my editor made suggestions for the most part, I was free to take those suggestions or reject them (as long as my reason for doing so was sound) I can only think of a couple of lines in one paragraph that my editor insisted that I change. Just my experience though, I'm sure others experiences with traditional publishers might differ. |
A_womon
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: A_womon
Post Number: 2037
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 05:33 pm: |
|
I might add that a lot of the suggestions my editor offered were excellent and made my manuscript much stronger, in my opinion. Most editors would rather shape than destroy a writer's voice, also IMO. |
Urban_scribe
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 599
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 07:54 pm: |
|
My personal experience as an editor: When an ms comes across my desk that requires 70% editing, it goes in the rejection pile. I would deem that ms as "not ready for publication". My role as editor is not to rewrite someone's work, rather to point out their weaknesses and inconsistencies and help them tighten up their writing. IMO, any editor who rewrites 70% of any writer's work is self-absorbed.
My personal experience as a writer: I have a tendency to over-explain things. So my editor made notes where I wrote enough for the reader to get "the point," and to cut the rest. My ms, as submitted, was 130k words. It was published at just over 120k, so it took about a 9k word beating; and the flow was greatly improved as a result. Just goes to show, even when you edit for a living, you can be too close to your own work to see its flaws. |
|
Email This Page