Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
Your statement above is little more than speculation that an editor employed by a Big Publishing house would have done a better job than the one employed by the particular academic publishing house.
|
When it comes to what makes for a great book, it will indeed always be a matter of opinion. But, while unproven, I think there's lots of evidence, found in any big library, that Random House titles are typically better written than narratives on the same topic from top academic publishers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
If this is the case, then no doubt a good freelance editor would also have done a better job.
|
I find considerable doubt. The big publisher editor has power to insist on changes because the author is under contract. While authors takes a financial hit when refusing structural edits, regardless of what type of editor is being dissed, the publishing company editor has more power.
There may be titles where the big publisher editor used his or her greater power to ruin a potential classic. But most I'm seeing go the other way.
I realize that my evidence, such as it is, focuses on narrative nonfiction. I'm less sure that there's the same dynamic with fiction.