Quote:
Originally Posted by Lloyd Tackitt
Writing rules are good to know, but then again rules tend to get in the way. The rules of writing are limiting. Working with arbitrary restrictions doesn't appeal to me, and writing rules are arbitrary, perhaps generally accepted but still arbitrary. Is it better to spin an interesting yarn or to get a good grade from the rules mavens? Doing both at the same time would be great, but perhaps too high a bar for me. That's ok, I can live with it.
On the other hand I have written quite a lot over the past few years for public consumption, and the feedback has been excellent. I have many fans that enjoy my writing. More by far than critics, regardless of my wandering outside the rules.
My question though, in short form is, how do you go about the editing process when the ms comes back. What is it that you do? There may only be one way, but I'm curious how others do it in case there are tips and techniques I'm not aware of.
|
Writing rules are not arbitary, any more than traffic rules are. There may be times when you need to break them, but ignoring them for the sake of "holding the reader's interest" is like driving carelessly because the road is supposed to be interesting.
If this editor is someone you have hired, you are free to reject her edits. But if it's an editor from a publishing house and you reject the edits, you'll find the publisher rejects your book. Publishers are interested in books with a certain standard of English, and won't accept "rules get in the way" as an excuse for why you haven't made the edits that were marked.
I've never had anyone come up and tell me that I have grammer or word use issues, unless I asked them directly. But you'd better believe that when my publisher's editor was through with it, my MS was buried under a bloodbath of red tracker comments of things she expected to be fixed.
Theren is no point having an editor if you don't allow her to edit.