Diary of a Mad Editor

Knopf editor, Carole Baron has posted this editorial on The Huffington Post entitled "Do You Really Need an Editor at a Publishing House?" which makes a case for why editors are still necessary.

The first thing that struck me about his post is how desperate Baron sounds. She’s not really addressing most writers here — not writers who can’t even get an agent much less sell their books to a major publishers. She’s really addressing writers (like the anonymous writer she mentions) who are already in the system who are maybe thinking that self-publishing, for one reason or another, is a good option for them. Except for reports that some writers are self-publishing eBooks for the Kindle may be making higher royalties than they would going through their publishers, I somehow doubt there are a lot of writers in that system who are looking to jump ship, so maybe Ms. Baron’s plea is a little bit silly. On the other hand, while reading her post, I was reminded of that scene from Office Space in which Tom Smykowski is addressing the "Bobs" and says, "I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers don’t have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can’t you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?"

Certainly, I’ve heard tales from writers I know who’ve suggested to me that possibly some editors don’t work as hard for some writers as they do for others. I know of at least two writers who were basically hung out to dry by their publishers when those editors jumped to other publishing houses. And, I’ve certainly read books published by major publishers that made me question whether anyone edits anything anymore. I’ll give you a for instance: Last year, I got hooked on this show, Legend of the Seeker. I don’t know what it is about the show — the hot women in leather, the swordplay that takes me back to playing pretend as a child. Whatever the reason, the show has become a guilty pleasure. So much so, I decided a while back to try reading the books the show is based on. For those of you not familiar with the show, it’s based on the Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind. I should preface my comments by admitting that I’m not a major reader of fantasy novels. I think most fantasy novels are dumb, unoriginal and poorly-written, so I’ve limited my exposure since entering adulthood. Anyway, I went to the library and checked out Book Four in the series. I wasn’t all that impressed to tell the truth. I thought the characters were pretty thin and one-dimensional and the dialogue — some of the most horrible dialogue I’ve ever encountered. I wondered if the book had been edited at all and thought, if it had been edited, how bad was the book before the editor put hands on it? Anyway, after that, I decided to keep watching the TV show and forget the novels by Goodkind (Yeah, I half expect to receive hate mail from Goodkind fans now).

Anyway, I think the question of whether editors edit anymore is a far less interesting than whether or not we still need  traditional publishing houses anymore. Because, let’s face it. If you’re a major bestselling author with a huge fan-base, you could probably do just as well for yourself or even better self-publishing. And if I’m Stephen King or someone like that, I’ve got to at least consider the option, don’t I? And if you’re completely disenfranchised from the traditional publishing industry. Can’t get an agent, can’t get your foot in the door — then self-publishing may be you’re only option.  There’s no denying that an editor provides a necessary service to an author, but is a traditional publishing house the only place to get that service?

Let’s examine Baron’s list:

l. Choosing the book

2. Negotiating the deal with the author or agent

3. Editing the book

4. Working with copy editing, design, and production

5. Writing jacket copy and catalog copy; work with the art director on the jacket

6. Positioning the book within the company as an advocate to sales and marketing

7. Being aware of what is happening in the publishing business so you can make informed decisions

8. Communicating to the author and agent what is happening to the book along the way.

9. When the book is published, cheering for the good reviews and commiserating for the bad ones (and explaining that even Jane Austen and Herman Melville got bad reviews).

10. Being there for the author’s next book.

1. Hmm. Well, if you self-publish, you don’t really need an editor to choose your book, now do you?

2. If you self-publish, you don’t need a literary agent, so there’s nothing to negotiate.

3. There are plenty of freelance editors out there — many of whom have experience working in the book publishing industry so this work can be outsourced.

4. Again, this work can be outsourced.

5. Yet another thing that can be outsourced.

6. Certainly, this is an important advantage of being published through a traditional publisher but only because the scales are tipped in favor of traditional publishing. As the stigma against self-publishing erodes this, too, may become kind of irrelevant.

7. Well, if the writer keeps on top of what’s going on in the publishing business, he doesn’t need an editor’s input to make informed decisions.

8. Again, if you self-publish, this is completely irrelevant.

9. Don’t read reviews. Honestly, book reviews don’t have that much influence over what people choose to read anyway. And a writer should never write for his critics be they good or bad. So don’t read reviews.

10. Once again, completely irrelevant if you self-publish.

But, don’t get me wrong, despite my current role as devil’s advocate, I’m not saying every writer who currently publishes with a traditional publishing house should jump ship and start self-publishing. Self-publishing definitely has it’s pitfalls and aside from that, most writers are ill-equipped for what self-publishing entails. Any idiot can upload a digital file of a manuscript to a self-publishing service and have a book made in short order. It takes more than that to make a good book and get people to buy and read that book. That being said, traditional publishers and those working for traditional publishers can no longer afford to be dismissive of self-publishing. There are good reasons why this is increasingly becoming an option for many writers and it is not some fad that’s going away. If you’ve got the means and motivation to self-publish the right way, the technology is available to completely bypass traditional publishers. So maybe it’s a good thing that that option is available to writers. <shrugs> It certainly doesn’t help traditional publishers for an experienced, well-known editor such as Ms. Baron, to make a public plea justifying her existence. She sounds like a car insurance salesman. Jesus Mary and Joseph, have some pride!

Diary of a Mad Editor is now available on the Amazon Kindle for a regular subscription price of $1.99 per month.  That’s just seven cents per day! Yeah, I know — why subscribe to something you can access for free? Well, it’s only free on the Internet. If you own a Kindle and want to read this blog on your Kindle, it’s $1.99. Which breaks down to $24 for a year or seven cents a day, like I said. Why am I doing this? Well, for one thing, I’m curious to know if anyone reading this blog values it enough to pay for content — I’m betting not, but I’m always up for being proved wrong (hasn’t happened yet). I’m also curious to know how many people read this blog also own a Kindle (again, I’m betting not many do, but I’m up for being proved wrong as I said). Lastly, in case I am wrong, I could use the extra money.

Before I head off to the gym in my ongoing quest for stomach fat loss, I thought I’d respond to this post by Dan Agin on The Huffington Post. "Kindle Armageddon . . . " echoes the pro-eBook theme, I’ve been drumming for a while. But that’s not why I wanted to respond to it, exactly. Mainly, I wanted to react to many negative comments made to the post from individuals who, like certain publishers, see eBooks as the enemy of regular books. I suppose it’s human nature to be protective of an old technology in the face of a newer technology that is perceived as a replacement.

Although, Agin’s post was a little too Kindle-centric in his view of eBook market, his core message that eBooks are not a fad and publishers need to get with the program is right on target. I don’t believe he’s making a case against regular printed books or suggested that eBooks are superior or even that eBooks will ever completely replace printed books as these commenters suggest. He’s merely saying what I and many others have been saying all along — that if publishers continue to fight against the advent of the eBook as a serious medium for the written word, they do so at their own peril.

Personally, I love printed books as I’ve stated many times in the past. I’ve read thousands of books in my lifetime and I currently own hundreds of them. But, if I could afford an eReader, I’d own one of those too. As one commenter stated, it’s true that "eReaders and eBooks are not a necessity" — but there are times when it would be damn convenient to have an eReader.

I remember when I was a senior in college. On Thursdays, my final semester, I had this window of several hours between my Shakespeare II class and my T.S. Eliot seminar in the evening. I would kill time as best as I could. Mostly, though, I read books. I would carry around several at one time, usually polishing off 5-10 volumes per week. Once, I even read 20 books in one week (a fete I haven’t duplicated since). As much as I loved reading, carrying around all those books every day was a pain in the ass (and back and shoulders, etc.) If the technology had been available back then, I definitely would’ve had me an eReader. Likewise, right after graduation, I found myself on a long train ride to visit my grandmother. Plenty of books to read, but not a lot of physical space to stretch out and enjoy. An eReader might’ve made the experience a bit more pleasurable as I wouldn’t have had to bother my neighbor every time I wanted to retrieve another book. Just before Christmas, I was waiting on my father at his doctor’s office. I had a library book — a hardcover. It was a long wait and after a time holding the weight of the book became a little uncomfortable. Not to mention the fact that nearly every time I flipped a page this old man would throw me a hard stare as if the barely audible sound of a page turning was somehow rude. Having an eReader in the doctor’s waiting room would’ve been nice. And there’ve been plenty of other occasions where I’d have preferred an eBook to a so-called "real" book. And that’s what eBooks are good for — not as a permanent replacement for physical books, but as nifty stand-ins when regular books aren’t as convenient or readily available.

Regardless of whether you agree with that assessment or not, eBooks are here to stay, so killing the messenger won’t change the message or alter reality.