Questions from a new author
Published by Deanna Hoak November 10th, 2005 in copyeditingA new author wrote to me yesterday asking for advice on the proper way to deal with his copyedited manuscript (which I was not the copyeditor on). He was very grateful to the copyeditor for catching some embarrassing inconsistencies, but was uncertain about some of the other changes. I offered him my advice and am reprinting it here, with his permission, since he seemed to find it helpful. His questions are in italic; my answers are Roman.
My novel is in first-person, present tense, from the POV of a teenager. So there are a LOT of non-standard usages, simply because — in my opinion — the whole book should be considered to be between quotations marks as one long stream of consciousness monologue. There are a slew of “corrections” that don’t take this into account, making things more grammatical at the expense of the voice. I am stetting these things with no guilty pangs whatsoever. :)
Yep. Stet them.
What baffles me, though, are the changes that seem pointless. Things like changing “goddamned” to “goddamn” or “towards” to “toward” or “showed” to “shown” or “half-sister” to “half sister,” when in every case the original is correct. The CORRECTION is also correct, but why change that? Why go to the trouble?
“Toward” is considered American English, while “towards” is considered British. In reality, I hear either in American speech; copyeditors are taught to Americanize it, though I leave it alone in dialogue. (And probably in yours I would, too.) I wouldn’t have changed goddamned in a first-person.
For hyphenation, publishers prefer that copyeditors use Merriam-Webster’s 11th New Collegiate Dictionary and The Chicago Manual of Style. According to Web11, “half sister” is correct.
On the one hand, I’m tempted to skip these because the correction IS correct, after all. But then I figured that if I spend the time to
stet them, 1) the book remains closer to my original text (while still being correct) and 2) it’s less work for some poor keyboarder
and/or type-setter to do.My advice in general would be to pick the hills you’ll die on. :-) [And as an aside, I shamelessly stole that notion from 's wonderful post "Congratulations: It's a Baby Novel."] Leave alone anything that you feel doesn’t directly affect your voice. If you stet too much, your editor won’t know what’s truly important to you. I would note, though, when you send it back, that you’re making so many corrections because of the fact that your book is first person; you’re right about it basically all being dialect in that case.
There you have it, in case it’s of use to anyone else.
13 Responses to “Questions from a new author”
Leave a Reply
Search
About
I'm a freelance copyeditor specializing in fantasy and science fiction. SF/F novels I have copyedited have been finalists for (and have sometimes won) the Hugo, Nebula, Arthur C. Clarke, Golden Spur, John W. Campbell Memorial, Quill, Locus, Philip K. Dick, British Science Fiction, British Fantasy, and World Fantasy awards. In 2007 I was short-listed for a World Fantasy Award for my copyediting.
RSS FeedCategories
- blog (462)
- conventions (14)
- copyediting (54)
- food (12)
- grammar (2)
- kids (21)
- praise (14)
- SFnal (10)
- writing (23)
And if you really feel like the copyeditor is noting things you’d really really really like to stay, and you’re writing a series, and you don’t want to have to repeat yourself the second time around (although the CE should have a style sheet, but you never know if this CE will be the next one), TALK TO YOUR EDITOR.
Editors can’t change things if they don’t know about them. They’re not psychic or telepathic no matter what it says on their business cards. ;-)
I really appreciate your CE posts. Some times they affirm things I’ve been thinking, other times they are really educational for me. So, thanks for posting this!
I always did “toward” but saw “towards” so many places, I would question whether I was doing it correctly. Now I know it might indicate I read a lot of British writers (which I do, your Mieville being a case in point, Lumley another favorite of mine) or that I’m reading material that’s edited by someone who doesn’t exhibit a preference toward one or the other.
I’d just assume that you know what you’re doing, that I’m an idiot, and correct accordingly. :-p
As the author in question, let me say that there can be no doubt: I am certainly an idiot. That’s true for this instance and all others. :)
In this particular instance I was trying to find that line between voice and consistency, and doing so while also trying to juggle the issues that were really, REALLY stupid goof-ups on my part. And, further, trying to figure out if some of these things were just my own peculiar way of thinking or if they, too, were monumental screw-ups. (Which I wouldn’t put past me.)
For example, I had no idea I was British until now. :)
It was, for me, a question of which standard to follow – mine or the publisher’s? Neither is inherently superior, but they are different.
All’s well that ends well, though — between the editor, the copyeditor, and me, I think we nailed it all down. And Deanna’s comments helped me to find that elusive line and kept me from tripping over it like a skateboard in the night.
Thanks again, Deanna.
I grew up in Maryland, and have said “towards” since I was a child. There are plenty of Americans who say it. I tend to think of it as [in the US] a Southernism, but it is definitely used in this country.
Author: If there are specific usages you want to keep, you can reply to your editor and say, “Please stet all usages of ‘half-sister,’ ‘towards,’ whatever.” I would mark them individually as well. Unless your usage is really odd, and as long as you don’t give them a whole long laundry list of things, they will probably respect this.
I have seen a number of authors submit a note to the copy editor when they submit the MS. It says something like, “I use the following nonstandard usages. [list, sometimes extensive] Please leave them alone.” I encourage authors to do this; it makes it easier for everyone.
I, too, am apparently British. I’m pretty much against the enforcement of that “rule” in the US, though I agree that it should be consistent throughout one author’s book. (I probably am inconsistent.)
Yeah, but really, with first person, I don’t think he should have to do that. Dialect itself varies by person and situation, and might vary even beyond what he put in the style sheet.
Funny — I grew up in Maryland, too. Maybe that’s where it comes from. I prefer to think I’ve been British all along and just never realized. :) How cool would THAT be?
To use a phrase I usually despise: “It’s all good.” Everyone’s onboard and pushing in the same direction with the book, and it’s been a great opportunity for all of us to figure out how the others involved work.
The great thing about the web (and folks like our hostess, of course) is that it allows situations like this to expand beyond a vacuum and help other folks down the road. So maybe someone who reads this will get their copyedited manuscript in the future and NOT immediately assume that he or she wasted his/her English degree. :)
And in some lines — such as RPG lines — or companies, there may be a styleguide that states whether it’s toward or towards. (I say towards, blame my mom for living in England for a while, and correct to toward when doing RPG stuff for SJ Games.)
People in the real world don’t all use the same word, so I don’t see much sense in making all the characters in a book use the same one.
That’s VERY true and is something that, from the writing end, is easy to allow to turn into a mesh of self-doubt. Something as simple as “toward” and “towards” is SO simple that you (meaning, er, I) start to think, “Why am I even stressing over this? It’s such a minor thing, such an unimportant word…” And then, when you DO think it’s important, you start to think, “Am I becoming a prima donna here? Does it matter THAT MUCH?”
Or maybe I’m just extra neurotic! Mom always said so…
:)
By all of which I mean this: Writing and copyediting seem, to me, almost like a fractal — the closer you look, the more you see, and the easier it is to get entangled in the multiple levels.